The URL can be used to link to this page

CP 2018-03-27City Council City of Coppell, Texas Meeting Agenda 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 Council Chambers5:30 PMTuesday, March 27, 2018 KAREN HUNT NANCY YINGLING Mayor Mayor Pro Tem CLIFF LONG GARY RODEN Place 1 Place 4 BRIANNA HINOJOSA-FLORES MARVIN FRANKLIN Place 2 Place 6 WES MAYS MARK HILL Place 3 Place 7 MIKE LAND City Manager Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas will meet in Regular Called Session at 5:30 p.m. for Executive Session, Work Session will follow immediately thereafter, and Regular Session will begin at 7:30 p.m., to be held at Town Center, 255 Parkway Boulevard, Coppell, Texas. As authorized by Section 551.071(2) of the Texas Government Code, this meeting may be convened into closed Executive Session for the purpose of seeking confidential legal advice from the City Attorney on any agenda item listed herein. The City of Coppell reserves the right to reconvene, recess or realign the Work Session or called Executive Session or order of business at any time prior to adjournment. The purpose of the meeting is to consider the following items: 1.Call to Order 2.Executive Session (Closed to the Public) 1st Floor Conference Room Section 551.071, Texas Government Code - Consultation with City Attorney and Section 551.074, Texas Government Code - Personnel Matters. A.Seek legal advice and deliberate concerning a citizen complaint surrounding the duties of the City Manager. Page 1 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 March 27, 2018City Council Meeting Agenda Section 551.087, Texas Government Code - Economic Development Negotiations. B.Discussion regarding economic development prospects north of Sandy Lake Boulevard and east of Freeport Parkway. C.Discussion regarding economic development prospects south of Dividend and west of Point West Boulevard. 3.Work Session (Open to the Public) 1st Floor Conference Room A.Presentation on advanced water meter project. B.Discussion regarding bike sharing. C.Discussion regarding bicycle lanes on Moore Road, Heartz Road and Riverchase Drive. D.Discussion regarding the Parkway Boulevard reconstruction project. E.Discussion regarding rehabilitation of Water Tower #1. F.Discussion of agenda items. SECO Work Session Memo.pdf Bike Sharing Memo.pdf Bicycle Lanes Memo.pdf Water Tower Memo.pdf Attachments: Regular Session 4.Invocation 7:30 p.m. 5.Pledge of Allegiance 6.Consider approval of Proclamation naming March 27, 2018, as “Ken Griffin Appreciation Day;” and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Ken Griffin Proclamation.pdfAttachments: 7.Presentation to the Coppell Fire Department on receiving the Texas Fire Chief Association, “Lone Star Achievement Award.” Staff Memo-Lonestar Achievement Award.pdfAttachments: 8.Presentation to the Coppell Fire Department on receiving the Texas Fire Chief Association, “Fire Safety Award.” Staff Memo-LSP Fire Safety Award.pdfAttachments: 9.Presentation by the Coppell Arts Council on the Andy Brown East Art Stroll. 10.Citizens’ Appearance 11.Consent Agenda A.Consider approval of the minutes: February 27, 2018. Page 2 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 March 27, 2018City Council Meeting Agenda Minutes - City Council Meeting - 02-27-2018.pdfAttachments: B.Consider approval of an Ordinance for PD-292-SF-12, Coppell Middle School East, a zoning change request from SF-12 (Single Family-12) to PD-292-SF-12 (Planned Development 292-SF-12) to allow the construction of a concession and restroom facility, bleachers, press box, parking and the addition of lighting for the existing track and football field, on 24.7 acres of property located at 400 Mockingbird Lane, at the request of Coppell Independent School District; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Cover Memo.pdf Ordinance for PD 292-SF12 CMSE.pdf Exhibit A - Legal Description.pdf Exhibit B - Site Plan.pdf Exhibit C - Bleachers (C-4 and C-4a).pdf Exhibit D - Press Box (C-5).pdf Exhibit E - Concession Building Elevations (C-6).pdf Exhibit F - Field Lighting (C-7).pdf Exhibit G - Photometric Study.pdf Attachments: C.Consider approval of an Ordinance for Case No. PD-294-C, Alpine Wash, White Glove Express Addition, Lot 1R1, Block A, a zoning change request from S-1074RR-C (Special Use Permit-1074 Revision 2-Commercial) to PD-294-C (Planned Development District-294-Commercial) to amend the Detail Site Plan to allow the renovation and expansion of existing car wash facility to include self-service vacuums on 1.020 acres on property located at 250 S. Denton Tap Road; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Cover Memo.pdf Ordinance.pdf Exhibit A - Legal Description.pdf Exhibit B - Site Plan.pdf Exhibit C - Landcape Plan and Tree Survey.pdf Exhibit D - Building Elevations.pdf Exhibit E - Signage.pdf Attachments: D.Consider approval of an Ordinance for Case No. PD-217R2-C, Doggie’s Wonderland, a zoning change from C (Commercial) and PD-217R-C (Planned Development District-217 Revised-Commercial) to PD-214R2-C (Planned Development District Revision-2-Commercial) to amend and expand the Detail Site Plan for the existing 0.692 acre Doggie’s Wonderland site and to allow the construction of an approximate 3,000 square foot building for a kennel (rescue), self-service pet wash and bakery use on 0.439 acres and to establish a Concept Plan for future development on the remaining 0.346 acres, for a total of 1.479 acres of land located on the east side of Denton Tap Road between E. Bethel School Road and Page 3 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 March 27, 2018City Council Meeting Agenda Vanbebber Drive, (120 E. Bethel School Road and 400 S. Denton Tap Road); and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Cover Memo.pdf Ordinance.pdf Exhibit A - Legal Description.pdf Exhibit B - Site Plan.pdf Exhibit C - Landscape Plan and Tree Survey.pdf Exhibit D- Elevations and Rendering.pdf Exhibit E - Floor Plan.pdf Attachments: E.Consider award of bid and authorize a NCPA contract with Core Construction in the amount of $200,584.34, as budgeted from the Crime Control District, for the remodel of the communication area in the Criminal Justice facility located at 130 Town Center Blvd.; and authorizing the City Manager to sign and execute any necessary documents. PD Dispatch Remodel - Memo.pdf PD Dispatch Remodel - CORE Estimate.pdf Attachments: F.Consider approval of a professional services agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.; to provide professional engineering services for interim improvements for the North Lake Raw Water System; for a total of $138,700.00; as budgeted in the Capital Improvement Program; and authorizing the City Manager to authorize any necessary documents. Kimley Horn North Lake Raw Water Improvements Memo.pdf Northlake Water Supply Study REV.pdf North Lake Raw Water Feasibility.pdf North Lake Raw Water Interim Improvements Contract.pdf Attachments: End of Consent Agenda 12.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of an Ordinance of the City of Coppell, Texas, readopting, ratifying, republishing and extending Chapter 9 of the Code of Ordinances, Article 9-19, Youth Camp Programs Standards of Care; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Memo.pdf Standards of Care 2018.pdf Ordinance.pdf Attachments: 13.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of the location of a public safety building (fire station) on public owned property located at the intersection of Royal and North Point in the City of Coppell, Texas. Memo - FS4 Public Hearing.pdfAttachments: Page 4 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 March 27, 2018City Council Meeting Agenda 14.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider a Tariff authorizing an annual Rate Review Mechanism (“RRM”) as a substitution for the annual interim rate adjustment process defined by Section 104.301 of the Texas Utilities Code, and as negotiated between ATMOS Energy Corporation, Mid-Tex Division and the steering committee of cities served by ATMOS; requiring the company to reimburse cities’ reasonable ratemaking expenses. Memo - Atmos RRM.pdf ORDINANCE.pdf Mid-Tex RRM Tariff.pdf ATMOS RRM Exhibit A.pdf Attachments: 15.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of PD-293-LI, Sherrill Acres, a zoning change request from LI (Light Industrial) to PD-293-LI (Planned Development 293 -Light Industrial) to allow the subdivision of the property into two lots, allowing the retention of the existing office on Lot 2B1 and the approval of Concept Plan for Lot 2B2 for a future office building, containing 1.44 acres of property located at 1703 East Belt Line Road, at the request of Riverchase Realty LLC, being represented by Geoff Walker. Cover Memo.pdf Staff Report.pdf Site Plan.pdf Tree Survey.pdf Landscape Plan.pdf Attachments: 16.PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of an Ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 91500-A-718 for Case No. S-1262-LI, Driversselect, to no longer allow the occupancy of the existing 153,000 square foot office/warehouse building for internet-based car sales and ancillary uses (minor car repair, car storage and offices) on approximately 8.7 acres of land located at 100 S. Royal Lane; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Cover Memo.pdf Staff Report.pdf Letter from ML Realty.pdf Rescinding Ord S-1262-LI.pdf OR 91500-A-718 Driversselect.pdf Attachments: 17.Consider approval of an Ordinance for Case No. S-1262R-LI, Driversselect (Fellowship of Las Colinas Addition, Lot 2R1, Block 1), a zoning change from LI (Light Industrial) to S-1262R-LI (Special Use Permit-1262 Revised) to allow for vehicle parking and staging on the existing parking lot in conjunction with S-1262-LI on approximately 7.67 Page 5 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 March 27, 2018City Council Meeting Agenda acres of land located west of the terminus of Gateview Blvd; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Cover Memo.pdf Ordinance.pdf Exhibit B - Site Plan.pdf Attachments: 18.Consider approval of contract amendment number one to J. Volk Consulting, Inc. design contract for the Parkway Blvd. reconstruction project; in the amount of $178,600; and authorizing the City Manager to sign any necessary documents. Parkway - CA #1 Memo.pdf Parkway Original Award Exhibit.pdf Parkway CA#1 Exhibit.pdf Parkway - OPC.pdf Parkway Design Schedule.pdf Parkway Geometric.pdf Parkway - CA #1.pdf Attachments: 19.Consider approval of award of a professional services agreement with Kimley Horn, in the amount of $79,500.00, to design signage and pavement markings depicting on-street bicycle lanes for Moore Road, Heartz Road and Riverchase Drive; and authorizing the City Manager to sign all necessary documents. Memo.pdf Map of Proposed Bike Lanes.pdf Contract.pdf Attachments: 20.Consider approval of the modifications to the Trail Implementation Plan as recommended by the Parks and Recreation Board and; authorizing the City Manager to sign the necessary documents. Memo.pdf Trail Appendix.pdf Attachments: 21.Consider approval of a professional services agreement between the City of Coppell and Future iQ for professional facilitation services for the Vision 2040 Strategic Plan; and authorizing the City Manager to sign. Vision2040Memo.pdf FutureIQ Agreement.pdf Attachments: 22.CITIZEN’S AGENDA REQUEST: Issues with (1) making both lanes Right-turn only thus preventing citizens from turning left on Parkway Blvd to return home from the school and causing traffic hazards by compelling these citizens to make a right and then make U-Turns and, (2) inquiring into the functionality of said traffic Page 6 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 March 27, 2018City Council Meeting Agenda control device since it’s installation. Memo - Venky Venkatraman.pdf Certified ORR from City of Coppell.pdf Email.pdf FW_ Traffic signal question.pdf Attachments: 23.City Manager Reports - Project Updates and Future Agendas 24.Mayor and Council Reports A.Report by Mayor Hunt regarding upcoming Spring events. B.Report by Mayor Hunt regarding upcoming elections. 25.Council Committee Reports concerning items of community involvement with no Council action or deliberation permitted. A.North Texas Council of Governments - Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling B.North Texas Commission - Councilmember Marvin Franklin C.Historical Society - Councilmember Cliff Long 26.Public Service Announcements concerning items of community interest with no Council action or deliberation permitted. 27.Necessary Action from Executive Session Adjournment ________________________ Karen Selbo Hunt, Mayor CERTIFICATE I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted on the bulletin board at the City Hall of the City of Coppell, Texas on this 23rd day of March 2018, at _____________. ______________________________ Jean Dwinnell, Deputy City Secretary Page 7 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 March 27, 2018City Council Meeting Agenda PUBLIC NOTICE - STATEMENT FOR ADA COMPLIANCE AND OPEN CARRY LEGISLATION The City of Coppell acknowledges its responsibility to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990. Thus, in order to assist individuals with disabilities who require special services (i.e. sign interpretative services, alternative audio/visual devices, and amanuenses) for participation in or access to the City of Coppell sponsored public programs, services and/or meetings, the City requests that individuals makes requests for these services forty-eight (48) hours ahead of the scheduled program, service, and/or meeting. To make arrangements, contact Vivyon V. Bowman, ADA Coordinator or other designated official at (972) 462-0022, or (TDD 1-800-RELAY, TX 1-800-735-2989). Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by license holder with a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (handgun licensing law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun. Pursuant to Section 30.07, Penal Code (trespass by license holder with an openly carried handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (handgun licensing law), may not enter this property with a handgun that is carried openly. Page 8 City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3857 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3857 Agenda Item Executive Session 1Version: Reference: In Control: City Secretary 03/21/2018File Created: Final Action: Executive SessionFile Name: Title: Seek legal advice and deliberate concerning a citizen complaint surrounding the duties of the City Manager. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: A. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3857 Title Seek legal advice and deliberate concerning a citizen complaint surrounding the duties of the City Manager. Summary Fiscal Impact: Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3857) Staff Recommendation: Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Business Prosperity Community Wellness and Enrichment Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3845 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3845 Agenda Item Executive Session 1Version: Reference: In Control: City Council 03/19/2018File Created: Final Action: exec session - eco dev n of sandy lake, e of freeport.File Name: Title: Discussion regarding economic development prospects north of Sandy Lake Boulevard and east of Freeport Parkway. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: B. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3845 Title Discussion regarding economic development prospects north of Sandy Lake Boulevard and east of Freeport Parkway. Summary Fiscal Impact: [Enter Fiscal Impact Statement Here] Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3845) Staff Recommendation: [Enter Staff Recommendation Here] Goal Icon: Business Prosperity Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3856 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3856 Agenda Item Executive Session 1Version: Reference: In Control: City Council 03/20/2018File Created: Final Action: exec session - eco dev s. of dividend, w. of point westFile Name: Title: Discussion regarding economic development prospects south of Dividend and west of Point West Boulevard. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: C. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3856 Title Discussion regarding economic development prospects south of Dividend and west of Point West Boulevard. Summary Fiscal Impact: [Enter Fiscal Impact Statement Here] Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3856) Staff Recommendation: [Enter Staff Recommendation Here] Goal Icon: Business Prosperity Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3803 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3803 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: City Secretary 02/09/2018File Created: Final Action: Work SessionFile Name: Title: A.Presentation on advanced water meter project. B.Discussion regarding bike sharing. C.Discussion regarding bicycle lanes on Moore Road, Heartz Road and Riverchase Drive. D.Discussion regarding the Parkway Boulevard reconstruction project. E.Discussion regarding rehabilitation of Water Tower #1. F.Discussion of agenda items. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: Sponsors: Enactment Date: SECO Work Session Memo.pdf, Bike Sharing Memo.pdf, Bicycle Lanes Memo.pdf, Water Tower Memo.pdf Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3803 Title A.Presentation on advanced water meter project. Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3803) B.Discussion regarding bike sharing. C.Discussion regarding bicycle lanes on Moore Road, Heartz Road and Riverchase Drive. D.Discussion regarding the Parkway Boulevard reconstruction project. E.Discussion regarding rehabilitation of Water Tower #1. F.Discussion of agenda items. Summary Fiscal Impact: Staff Recommendation: Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Business Prosperity Community Wellness and Enrichment Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Noel Bernal, Deputy City Manager Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Work Session -Performance Contracting Presentation by State Energy Conservation Office (SECO) 2030: Sustainable City Government, Goal 3 Excellent and Well-maintained City Infrastructure and Facilities General Information: Dub Taylor, Director for SECO will make a presentation in work session concerning performance contracting. 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Mindi Hurley, Director of Community Development Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Discussion related to Bicycle Sharing in Coppell 2030: Special Place to Live, Sustainable City Government, Community Enrichment & Wellness Introduction: What is bike sharing? Bike share comes in different forms. Bikes that are locked to a docking station or kiosk, then checked out and back into the same or another docking station/kiosk for a small fee and a deposit to cover the bike. The newer form of bike sharing consist of dockless/stationless bicycles that are locked to themselves. These are GPS based and are coordinated through a smart phone app that shows where bikes are located and a credit card is used in the app to unlock the wheel from the frame. The user pays based on the time they use the bike (typically $1.00 per hour). Both types of bike sharing will touch Coppell in some form or fashion in the near future. Cypress Waters Station and the current construction of the trail system connection with the Campion Trail are factors contributing to staff addressing the topic of Bike Sharing in Coppell. The planned Cypress Waters Station is in the City of Dallas, which currently allows dockless /stationless bike sharing. Commuters beginning and ending their trips at the station will need to find other modes of transportation to and from that point. It is inevitable that bicycles will be an option along with other modes (ride sharing, taxi’s, & shuttles) to serve the commuters. This is often called the “first mile/last mile leg of the commute”. Also, the construction of the trail system along E Belt Line is expected to be finished by the fall of this year. This will complete the connection that ties to Irving’s Campion Trail, which provides a route for bicycles to be ridden to Coppell. Irving currently has an agreement with VBikes to operate a docked bicycle system on the Campion Trail with several docking stations. When this trail connection is complete, it is recommended that we have the tools in place to responsibly regulate these bikes. Advocates of the dockless/stationless bikes like the accessibility, the affordability and the fact that they provide an environmentally friendly method of transportation. The overwhelming concerns with dockless/stationless bicycles is #1 the abundance of them, #2 safety hazards if left within the right -of-way obstructing a sidewalk or roadway and #3 the visual clutter they create. The bicycle sharing policies and regulations (or lack thereof) of surrounding cities have been researched. Analysis: Because this is a fairly new topic and policies and regulations in our surrounding cities are just being drafted or have just been approved, few cities in Texas have much experience in regulating dockless/stationless bik e 2 sharing. Highland Park recently adopted an ordinance prohibiting any dockless/stationless bikes being left in the right-of-way. Carrollton is discussing the topic at their Council Meeting on March 20, 2018. McKinney is currently researching the subject and gathering feedback from their policy-makers to determine how to proceed. Plano and Denton recently adopted pilot programs establishing a permitting program with the bike sharing companies to allow them within the right-of-way provided certain parameters are met. Similarly, staff is recommending a permit be the means of allowing for and regulating bike sharing within Coppell’s right -of- way. Some of the key points we would like to cover within the permit are: • Term of the permit. • Allowance of bikes within rights-of-way • Allowance of bikes on the city’s trail system, Andy Brown, Wagon Wheel, Square in Old Town (all neighborhood parks are not recommended) • Bicycles must meet federal and state standards and regulations • A requirement for bike share operators to submit a detailed implementation plan with a map showing the locations of proposed bike parking (home zones and bicycle racks to meet design standards and location to be approved by staff). Look at phasing bike rack installation, due to lack of kno wledge of the market. • Limit the total number of bikes per company at any one place to three (Plano) • Require GPS capability to assist with parking/location of bikes. • Require the company to rebalance bikes and submit a program to address complaints and reporting of those complaints. • Require the company to educate their customers on how to properly park and ride bicycles through signage, text messaging, and instructions on their app or website. Include incentives for riders to properly park bicycles. • Limit total number of bikes to 100 per company. • Service area – limit the bike parking to nonresidential areas of the city. • Requires contact information on all bicycles for notification and customer service purposes. • Data sharing with the city to assist with program evaluation and future infrastructure planning. • Establish an escrow of $5,000 to cover direct costs incurred by the city to pay for removal, storage and/or damage cause by the bicycle. Legal Review: We have consulted with the attorney throughout the research. Fiscal Impact: Within the recommendation, a fee based on number of bikes proposed is recommended. Also, an escrow is recommended to cover direct costs incurred by the City due to violations of the permit. Recommendation: Recommend the drafting of the ordinance incorporating necessary changes as a result of the workshop session. 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Brad Reid, Director of Parks and Recreation Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Consider approval of award of a professional services agreement with Kimley Horn, in the amount of $79,500.00, to design signage and pavement markings depicting on- street bicycle lanes for Moore Road, Heartz Road and Riverchase Drive; and authorizing the City manager to sign all necessary documents. 2030: Sustainable City Government Strategy: Excellent and Well-Maintained City Infrastructure and Facilities. Introduction: The 2010 Community Wide Trail Implementation Plan and the 2015 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan recommend on-street bike lanes for Moore Road, Heartz Road and Riverchase Drive. The Moore Road Trail is seen as one of the strongest links between the greatest number of neighborhoods and key destinations such as the Andrew Brown Park system, the extension of the Campion Trail and the future DART Rail Station. Although not dedicated as bike lanes, a striped lane currently exists on both sides of Riverchase Drive. This project would design signage and pavement markings depicting on-street bicycle lanes. Heartz Road will be studied within the scope of this project to create safe routes to school, as well as take advantage of an existing wide street. Fairway Drive from Beltline Road to Riverchase Drive will be studied within the scope of this project as it provides a critical connection to the future Cotton Belt Trail. Analysis: This project consists of the design for signage and pavement markings depicting on-street bicycle lanes with supporting directional signage consistent with the bikeway recommendations of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Each roadway is anticipated to include the following tasks: Task 1: Data Collection, Base Map Development, and Field Observation Task 2: Cross Section Development and Conceptual Layout Task 3: Meetings 2 Task 4: Design Services Task 5: Bidding and Construction Phase Services The following sections for roadways have been identified: Moore Road (from Andy Brown Park to Belt Line Road) – This roadway is identified on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan as a Bike Lane facility. This roadway is approximately 10,000 linear feet. Particular attention will be paid to the following intersections: Parkway Boulevard; Stringfellow Drive; Villawood; Sandy Lake Road; Bethel School Road and Belt Line Road. Heartz Road (from Sandy Lake Road to Parkway Boulevard) - This roadway is identified on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan as a Bike Lane facility. This roadway is approximately 3,000 linear feet. Particular attention will be paid to the Park Valley Drive intersection. Riverchase Drive (from Sandy Lake Road to MacArthur Boulevard) This roadway is identified on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan as a Bike Lane facility. This roadway is approximately 7,400 linear feet. Fairway Drive – (from Riverchase Drive to Belt Line Road) This roadway is not identified on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan but provides a critical connection to the Cottonbelt Rail-to-Trail. This roadway is approximately 1,000 linear feet. There is funding currently identified in the CRDC plan for 2017-18 to have this design completed, followed as quickly as possible with the project bidding, award and installation of the agreed upon scope. Included in this design process is a public input/awareness period that will allow for voices to be heard and necessary adjustments made to the plan. Legal Review: The attached agreement was reviewed and approved by legal counsel. Fiscal Impact: The fiscal impact of this Agenda item is $79,500 Recommendation: The Parks and Recreation Department recommends approval of this item. 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Ken Griffin, P.E., Director of Engineering and Public Works Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Work Session Discussion on Proposed Water Tower #1 Rehab 2030: Sustainable City Government, Goal 3 Excellent and Well-maintained City Infrastructure and Facilities General Information: • Dunham Engineering provided inspection services in July 2014 • Water Tower #1 was constructed in 1986 and is in fair condition • Discovered minor corrosion, less than 5%, recommended a new protective coating • Replace interior wet area coating with a three coat zinc/epoxy/epoxy coating system (15-20 years) $450,000 • Replace exterior coating with a four coat zinc/epoxy/polyurethane/fluoropolymer coating system (15-20 years) $600,000 • Strutctural repairs including the roof hatch = $50,000 (ladder replacements, roof vent installation, overflow pipe repair, door replacement, new safety climb device, etc….) • Engineering fees for design and construction management, approximately 20% of construction cost. • Received bids in 2015, low bid was $918,000, high bid was $937,000. Introduction: The elevated storage tank (water tower #1) at 520 Southwestern Blvd. was constructed in 1986. This tank has a capacity of 1.5 million gallons of storage and total height is 155 feet. In 2009, we placed a top coat paint on the outside of the tower to refresh the look of the tower. Now we are at the point that we need to perform a complete rehabilitation on the tower. The American Water Works Association (AWWA) and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) have requirements for the condition of water towers. Analysis: In July of 2014, we hired Dunham Engineering to perform inspection services to evaluate both towers and to provide recommendations on necessary maintenance based on AWWA and TCEQ 2 requirements and guidelines. Tower 1 being about 13 years older than tower #2, is the first one they recommended to perform a rehabilitation on. In their report, Dunham Engineering provided a list of items that needs to be included in the rehabilitation. Their recommendations include stripping of the interior and exterior paint, repainting the interior with at 3-coat blend and the exterior with a 4-coat blend. Both new coats are expected to last 15-20 years. There are many structural items that need to be replaced such as the roof vent, interior ladders, handrails, roof hatch, safety climb devices, the bowl manway as well as several other replacements. In 2015, we went out to bid for these services and received bids ranging from $918,00 to $937,000. The best time to perform this work is during the winter months, late November to early March. The tank must be emptied to perform the work and this is the time when we use less water. In late 2017, we had Dunham perform a follow up inspection to compare the condition from 2014. Their findings resulted in continued corrosion of the exterior coating. Their recommendation is to rehab the tower within the next 2 years. Legal Review: This item did not require legal review. Fiscal Impact: The amount being requested from the water/sewer revenue funds is $1.2 Million. Recommendation: Staff will bid this project out and will award a contract at a future council meeting. Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3854 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3854 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: City Council 03/20/2018File Created: Final Action: Proclamation - Ken GriffinFile Name: Title: Consider approval of Proclamation naming March 27, 2018, as “Ken Griffin Appreciation Day;” and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 6. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Ken Griffin Proclamation.pdfAttachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3854 Title Consider approval of Proclamation naming March 27, 2018, as “Ken Griffin Appreciation Day;” and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Summary Fiscal Impact: [Enter Fiscal Impact Statement Here] Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3854) Staff Recommendation: [Enter Staff Recommendation Here] Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Business Prosperity Community Wellness and Enrichment Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 THE ·CITY ·OF COPPELL PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, Ken Griffin was hired by the City of Coppell in December 1991 , when the City had a population of approximately 17,000 and there were approximately 250 employees ; and WHEREAS, Ken served under five city managers and made countless presentations to City Council over his 26-year tenure; and WHEREAS, Ken was instrumental in the completion of all phases of the Sandy Lake Road reconstruction project from Carrollton to Grapevine and the upgrade of the City 's water system, adding ground and elevated storage tanks and upsizing the water line to move the water throughout the City; and WHEREAS, Ken has been a leader and mentor to many throughout his years of service and has been an exemplary representative of the Engineering Department, and the organization as a whole; and WHEREAS, as a visionary, Ken assisted in the transition from a sparsely developed suburban city, to a much sought-after community of over 40 ,000 residents today ; and WHEREAS, Ken worked with directors and managers to develop a culture expectation for the organization on how we treat each other and provide service to the Coppell citizens; and WHEREAS, Ken has consistently lived, and encouraged others to live , the organization 's mission of "building community through public service." The legac y Ken built in the community will be evident for years to come . NOW, THEREFORE, I, Karen Selbo Hunt, Mayor of the City of Coppell , do hereb y proclaim March 27 , 2018 , as "KEN GRIF FIN APPRECIATION DAY " IN WITNESS WHERE OF , I have hereunto set my hand and caused to be affi x ed the official seal of the City of Coppell , this 27th day of March, 2018 . ATTE ST : Karen Selbo Hunt, Mayor Christel Pettinos , City Secretary Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3843 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3843 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: Fire 03/14/2018File Created: Final Action: Lonestar Achievement AwardFile Name: Title: Presentation to the Coppell Fire Department on receiving the Texas Fire Chief Association, “Lone Star Achievement Award.” Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 7. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Staff Memo-Lonestar Achievement Award.pdfAttachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 1 Kevin Richardson 1 3/15/20183/14/2018 Approve 1 Christel Pettinos - FYI 2 3/14/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3843 Title Presentation to the Coppell Fire Department on receiving the Texas Fire Chief Association, “Lone Star Achievement Award.” Summary The Coppell Fire Department is the recipient of the Texas Fire Chiefs Association, “Lone Star Achievement Award, recognizing a Texas Fire Department for implementing an innovative and Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3843) progressive program that enhances their community’s’ fire and life safety service delivery.” During challenging times, the four cities of Coppell, Carrolton, Farmers Branch, and Addison, Texas have joined forces and implemented several regional programs. Here are excerpts from the nomination: “The Quad Cities all collaborated and contributed towards the construction of a $2.4M joint fire training center that opened in 2017. Shared between the four cities, the facility includes a 6,854-square-foot interior training space, a six-story tower, and a four-story elevator shaft. Allowing for a robust set of drills, the training structure provides state-of-the-art fire science technology.” ” In the same vein of joining public safety efforts and resources, the North Texas Emergency Communications Center (NTECC), a joint dispatch center for Coppell, Carrollton, Addison, and Farmers Branch, was launched. The result is a completely brand new, state-of-the-art, facility from the ground up, staffing approximately 70 FTEs.” “The new NTECC facility compliments the Quad City-wide implementation of a new public safety radio system. Again, the four cities combined resources that included all the software and hardware necessary to implement a full P25 radio system.” Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact for this agenda item. Staff Recommendation: The Fire Department recommends that they be recognized for receiving the Texas Fire Chiefs Association, “Lone Star Achievement Award,” for their innovative regional partnerships; Joint Fire Training Facility, Joint Fire/EMS Dispatch, Combined P25 Digital Radio System. Goal Icon: Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Kevin Richardson, Fire Chief Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Texas Fire Chief Association’s Lone Star Achievement Award 2030: Sense of Community and Special Place to Live Introduction: Presentation to the Coppell Fire Department on receiving the Texas Fire Chief Association, “Lone Star Achievement Award.” Analysis: The Coppell Fire Department is the recipient of the Texas Fire Chiefs Association’s 2018, “Lone Star Achievement Award, recognizing a Texas Fire Department for implementing an innovative and progressive program that enhances their community’s’ fire and life safety service delivery.” During challenging times, the four cities of Coppell, Carrolton, Farmers Branch, and Addison, Texas have joined forces and implemented several regional programs. The innovative approach to combine resources has resulted in improving overall service delivery for all agencies. When combined, the Quad Cities support 16 Fire Stations and cover a population of approximately 250,000. These programs have been several years in the development and are now up and running. The Quad Cities all collaborated and contributed towards the construction of a $2.4M joint fire training center that opened in 2017. Shared between the four cities, the facility includes a 6,854- square-foot interior training space, a six-story tower, and a four-story elevator shaft. Allowing for a robust set of drills, the training structure provides state-of-the-art fire science technology including three burn rooms for varied extinguish scenarios, opportunities to practice multi-story rescues, flexibility to conduct multiple simultaneous exercises, as well as SWAT training including repelling. The construction of this facility is a major step towards interlocal cooperation. Area 2 firefighters having the ability to train, and practice together makes it safer for the firefighters and provides better service to the North Texas community. In the same vein of joining public safety efforts and resources, the North Texas Emergency Communications Center (NTECC), a joint dispatch center for Coppell, Carrollton, Addison, and Farmers Branch, was launched. The NTECC project was a concept that the Quad Cities explored for many years because of the expected benefits including expanding the pool of communications personnel available during higher call volume times and reduced long-term costs through combining resources to diminish duplication of expensive technology infrastructure and staffing. The result is a completely brand new, state-of-the-art, facility from the ground up, staffing approximately 70 FTEs. The new NTECC facility compliments the Quad City-wide implementation of a new public safety radio system. Again, the four cities combined resources that included all the software and hardware necessary to implement a full P25 radio system. Expenditures totaled approximately $25M. The radio project was in response to a federal mandate requiring public safety entities to bring communication systems into compliance with new digital technology by upgrading to a P25 standards-based radio system. Coppell switched from using an analog radio communications system to a suite of all-new digital radio systems. The P25 system is an effort to enable public safety organizations to communicate with other agencies and mutual aid response teams during emergencies. Automatic Aid Agreements are now in place with seamless call and dispatch of resources between the cities. Legal Review: Agenda item did not require legal review. Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact for this agenda item. Recommendation: The Fire Department recommends that they be recognized for receiving the Texas Fire Chiefs Association, “Lone Star Achievement Award,” for their innovative regional partnerships; Joint Fire Training Facility, Joint Fire/EMS Dispatch, Combined P25 Digital Radio System. Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3844 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3844 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: Fire 03/14/2018File Created: Final Action: Life Safety Park Fire Safety AwardFile Name: Title: Presentation to the Coppell Fire Department on receiving the Texas Fire Chief Association, “Fire Safety Award.” Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 8. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Staff Memo-LSP Fire Safety Award.pdfAttachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 1 Kevin Richardson 1 3/15/20183/14/2018 Approve 1 Christel Pettinos - FYI 2 3/14/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3844 Title Presentation to the Coppell Fire Department on receiving the Texas Fire Chief Association, “Fire Safety Award.” Summary The Coppell Fire Department is the recipient of the Texas Fire Chiefs Association ’s 2018, “Fire Safety Award, recognizing a Texas Fire Department for implementing an innovative and Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3844) progressive program that enhances their community’s’ fire and life safety service delivery.” In 2017, the City of Coppell opened Life Safety Park, a 15,000-square foot multi-building facility, which has a rooted mission of combining the community education directives of the fire department, police department, and other life safety aspects into one location. Life Safety Park is one of only two such facilities in the DFW Metroplex, making it special to Coppell and surrounding cities. Here is an excerpt from the nomination: “As such, Life Safety Park has established itself as an innovative and valuable tool in the pursuit of fire and life safety education. Life Safety Park and the partnership between citizens and many City departments is a notable example of how Coppell make life safety and public education a City-wide priority.” Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact for this agenda item. Staff Recommendation: The Fire Department recommends that they be recognized for receiving the Texas Fire Chiefs Association, “Lone Star Achievement Award,” for their innovative Critical Care Paramedic program. Goal Icon: Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Kevin Richardson, Fire Chief Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Texas Fire Chief Association’s Lone Star Achievement Award 2030: Sense of Community and Special Place to Live Introduction: Presentation to the Coppell Fire Department on receiving the Texas Fire Chief Association, “Fire Safety Award.” Analysis: The Coppell Fire Department is the recipient of the Texas Fire Chiefs Association’s 2018, “Fire Safety Award, recognizing a Texas Fire Department for implementing an innovative and progressive program that enhances their community’s’ fire and life safety service delivery.” In 2017, the City of Coppell opened Life Safety Park, a 15,000-square foot multi-building facility, which has a rooted mission of combining the community education directives of the fire department, police department, and other life safety aspects into one location. The feasibility, funding, planning, and construction spanned over several years before the grand opening of the $7.3 million facility in January 2017. The facility welcomes a broad spectrum of visitors, ranging in age from toddlers to senior citizens, including children, families, corporations, organizations, and general citizens. Of the five-building campus, the main educational building houses ample classroom space, a fire equipment museum, and the City’s Emergency Operations Center. The four remaining buildings comprise the outdoor 5/8 reduced-scale “Safety Town”, including an interactive house for home safety education, additional multipurpose classroom space, a public safety building with permanent fire and police apparatus, and a storage building for the battery-operated motor vehicles, bicycles, and other equipment. In addition to structured classes, the classrooms are utilized as meeting spaces by local businesses or organizations, while learning a life safety lesson taught by Life Safety Park staff. 2 “Safety Town” consists of streets, fully functioning traffic signals, pedestrian crosswalks/signals, varying building facades (e.g. City Hall, train station) and site props such as railroad tracks, a gas meter, and electrical transformers. Safety Town is true to life of what students see around Coppell and in their communities. Life Safety Park’s holistic vision is such that safer individuals lead to safer, healthier communities. The Emergency Operations Center (EOC), within the main education building, provides the City of Coppell a central command and control facility responsible for ensuring municipal operations are maintained throughout the city’s planned and other unforeseen events. In the case of an emergency incident, the EOC allows local government to provide interagency and interdepartmental coordination and executive decision making in support of incident response and recovery operations. The EOC can be expanded to the classrooms, adding more than fifty additional work spaces, voice-over-IP phones, and network infrastructure and connectivity for emergency staff. The EOC was designed for fault-tolerant redundant capabilities for local network, internet, radio, telecommunications, and power. Additionally, the core of the facility is a hardened structure with features such as steel reinforced concrete walls/ceiling and high-wind rated windows. Life Safety Park class topics include, but are not limited to, motor vehicle and pedestrian safety, bicycle safety, fire and burn prevention, first aid, cooking safety, smoke alarms, exit drills, fire extinguisher training (panel and stove), water/swimming and heat safety, CPR/AED training, severe weather awareness, Junior Police Academy, Police Explorers, and self-defense. Currently, Life Safety Park is one of only two such facilities in the DFW Metroplex, making it special to Coppell and surrounding cities. As such, Life Safety Park has established itself as an innovative and valuable tool in the pursuit of fire and life safety education. Life Safety Park and the partnership between citizens and many City departments is a notable example of how Coppell make life safety and public education a City-wide priority. Legal Review: Agenda item did not require legal review. Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact for this agenda item. Recommendation: The Fire Department recommends that they be recognized for receiving the Texas Fire Chiefs Association, “Lone Star Achievement Award,” for their innovative Critical Care Paramedic program. Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3855 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3855 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: City Council 03/20/2018File Created: Final Action: Coppell Arts Committee PresentationFile Name: Title: Presentation by the Coppell Arts Council on the Andy Brown East Art Stroll. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 9. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3855 Title Presentation by the Coppell Arts Council on the Andy Brown East Art Stroll. Summary Fiscal Impact: [Enter Fiscal Impact Statement Here] Staff Recommendation: Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3855) [Enter Staff Recommendation Here] Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Business Prosperity Community Wellness and Enrichment Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3853 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3853 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: City Council 03/20/2018File Created: Final Action: Minutes - February 27, 2018File Name: Title: Consider approval of the minutes: February 27, 2018. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: A. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Minutes - City Council Meeting - 02-27-2018.pdfAttachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3853 Title Consider approval of the minutes: February 27, 2018. Summary Fiscal Impact: [Enter Fiscal Impact Statement Here] Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3853) Staff Recommendation: Approval recommended. Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Business Prosperity Community Wellness and Enrichment Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 City of Coppell, Texas Minutes City Council 5:30 PM Council ChambersTuesday, February 27, 2018 KAREN HUNT NANCY YINGLING Mayor Mayor Pro Tem CLIFF LONG GARY RODEN Place 1 Place 4 BRIANNA HINOJOSA-FLORES MARVIN FRANKLIN Place 2 Place 6 WES MAYS MARK HILL Place 3 Place 7 MIKE LAND City Manager Karen Hunt;Cliff Long;Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Gary Roden;Marvin Franklin;Mark Hill and Nancy Yingling Present 7 - Wes MaysAbsent1 - Also present were City Manager Mike Land, Deputy City Managers Traci Leach and Noel Bernal, Deputy City Secretary Jean Dwinnell, and City Attorney Robert Hager. The City Council of the City of Coppell met in Regular Called Session on Tuesday, February 27, 2018, at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of Town Center, 255 Parkway Boulevard, Coppell, Texas. Call to Order1. Mayor Hunt called the meeting to order, determined that a quorum was present and convened into the Executive Session at 5:30 p.m. Executive Session (Closed to the Public) 1st Floor Conference Room2. Section 551.072, Texas Government Code - Deliberation regarding Real Property. Discussion regarding real property located south of East Belt Line and east of South Belt Line. Discussed under Executive Session. Page 1City of Coppell, Texas February 27, 2018City Council Minutes Work Session (Open to the Public) 1st Floor Conference Room3. Mayor Hunt adjourned the Executive Session and convened into the Work Session at 6:03 p.m. a.Discussion regarding the cancellation of the March 13 City Council Meeting. b.Discussion regarding the purchase of Vigilant Solutions Stationary LPR Package. c.Discussion regarding the RFP for Special Event Production Services. d.Discussion regarding the ASP Contract Extension. e.Presentation regarding the Rolling Oaks Memorial Cemetery Master Plan. f.Update on the Coppell Arts Center Design. g.Discussion regarding agenda items. Presented in Work Session. Regular Session Mayor Hunt adjourned the Work Session at 7:29 p.m. and reconvened into Regular Session at 7:37 p.m. Invocation 7:30 p.m.4. Pastor Chad Kettler, GracePoint Church, gave the Invocation. Pledge of Allegiance5. Mayor Hunt and the City Council led those present in the Pledge of Allegiance. Citizens’ Appearance6. Students representing the Imagine Beyond Foundation explained the purpose of the Foundation and invited the Council to participate in the Second Annual Walk-a-Thon and Fun Run on April 7th at Andy Brown East to benefit Autism Treatment Center of Dallas. Consent Agenda7. a.Consider approval of the minutes: February 13, 2018. A motion was made by Councilmember Marvin Franklin, seconded by Councilmember Gary Roden, that Consent Items A-I be approved. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Page 2City of Coppell, Texas February 27, 2018City Council Minutes b.Consider approval to purchase Vigilant Solutions Stationary LPR Package in the amount of $147,320.00 for the acquisition of three stationary license plate reader platforms with accompanying hardware, software, and training, as allocated in FY 2017-2018 budget; and authorizing the City Manager to sign any necessary documents. A motion was made by Councilmember Marvin Franklin, seconded by Councilmember Gary Roden, that Consent Items A-I be approved. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Aye:Councilmember Cliff Long;Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Councilmember Gary Roden;Councilmember Marvin Franklin;Councilmember Mark Hill and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 6 - c.Consider approval of a contract extension with Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc., for continued use of their Automated Scofflaw Program (ASP) service; and authorizing the City Manager to sign any necessary documents. A motion was made by Councilmember Marvin Franklin, seconded by Councilmember Gary Roden, that Consent Items A-I be approved. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Aye:Councilmember Cliff Long;Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Councilmember Gary Roden;Councilmember Marvin Franklin;Councilmember Mark Hill and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 6 - d.Consider approval of an Ordinance amending Section 8-1-3 of the Code of Ordinances to establish the Maximum Prima Facie Speed Limit of 20 mph for a portion of Freeport Parkway; from a point 200 feet north of the centerline of Fritz Drive to a point 300 feet south of the centerline of Fritz Drive; during the reconstruction of Freeport Parkway; in the city limits of the City of Coppell; establishing a fine; and providing an effective date; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. A motion was made by Councilmember Marvin Franklin, seconded by Councilmember Gary Roden, that Consent Items A-I be approved. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Aye:Councilmember Cliff Long;Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Councilmember Gary Roden;Councilmember Marvin Franklin;Councilmember Mark Hill and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 6 - Enactment No: 2018-1488 e.Consider approval of the cancellation of the March 13, 2018, City Council Meeting due to the date falling during Spring Break. A motion was made by Councilmember Marvin Franklin, seconded by Councilmember Gary Roden, that Consent Items A-I be approved. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Aye:Councilmember Cliff Long;Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Councilmember Gary Roden;Councilmember Marvin Franklin;Councilmember Mark Hill and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 6 - Page 3City of Coppell, Texas February 27, 2018City Council Minutes f.Consider approval of an Interlocal Agreement between the City of Coppell and the City of Southlake to establish a cooperative purchasing program for goods and services, and authorizing the Mayor to sign. A motion was made by Councilmember Marvin Franklin, seconded by Councilmember Gary Roden, that Consent Items A-I be approved. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Aye:Councilmember Cliff Long;Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Councilmember Gary Roden;Councilmember Marvin Franklin;Councilmember Mark Hill and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 6 - g.Consider approval of a proposal from B-Weiss Entertainment Group for Special Event Production Services, in an amount not to exceed $250,000 for services including talent buying, equipment rental, stage production and logistics and other event services, as budgeted, and authorizing the City Manager to execute all necessary documents. A motion was made by Councilmember Marvin Franklin, seconded by Councilmember Gary Roden, that Consent Items A-I be approved. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Aye:Councilmember Cliff Long;Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Councilmember Gary Roden;Councilmember Marvin Franklin;Councilmember Mark Hill and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 6 - h.Consider and authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a Purchase and Sale Agreement, and any necessary agreements and instruments related thereto, for the purchase of Lot 3, Block A of the Grapevine Springs Community Center Addition, approximately 0.23 acres of land; and authorize the Mayor to execute any acknowledgements. A motion was made by Councilmember Marvin Franklin, seconded by Councilmember Gary Roden, that Consent Items A-I be approved. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Aye:Councilmember Cliff Long;Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Councilmember Gary Roden;Councilmember Marvin Franklin;Councilmember Mark Hill and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 6 - i.Consider acceptance of resignation from Larry Jones, CRDC Member. A motion was made by Councilmember Marvin Franklin, seconded by Councilmember Gary Roden, that Consent Items A-I be approved. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Aye:Councilmember Cliff Long;Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Councilmember Gary Roden;Councilmember Marvin Franklin;Councilmember Mark Hill and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 6 - End of Consent Agenda Page 4City of Coppell, Texas February 27, 2018City Council Minutes 8.Consider approval of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2017 A presentation was made by Mr. John DeBurro, CPA, and Partner with Weaver Assurance Tax Advisory firm, regarding the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for FY 2016/17. A motion was made by Councilmember Marvin Franklin, seconded by Councilmember Gary Roden, that Agenda Item 8 be approved. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Aye:Councilmember Cliff Long;Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Councilmember Gary Roden;Councilmember Marvin Franklin;Councilmember Mark Hill and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 6 - 9.Consider approval of an award of RFP #151 to Online Business Systems (OBS) for Organizational Change Management (OCM) coaching and mentoring services, in the amount of $68,700, and authorizing the City Manager to sign the necessary documents. A presentation was made by Jennifer Miller, Director of Finance, regarding the proposed bid award to Online Business Systems (OBS) for coaching and mentoring services. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling, seconded by Councilmember Mark Hill, that Agenda Item 9 be approved. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Aye:Councilmember Cliff Long;Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Councilmember Gary Roden;Councilmember Marvin Franklin;Councilmember Mark Hill and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 6 - 10.CITIZEN’S AGENDA REQUEST: Issues with (1) making both lanes Right-turn only thus preventing citizens from turning left on Parkway Blvd to return home from the school and causing traffic hazards by compelling these citizens to make a right and then make U-Turns and, (2) inquiring into the functionality of said traffic control device since it’s installation. Mayor Hunt announced that the requester had asked for this item to be postponed until the Council meeting on March 27, 2018. She asked the Council for a motion regarding this request. A motion was made by Councilmember Brianna Hinojosa-Flores, seconded by Councilmember Mark Hill, to postpone Agenda Item 10 until the Council meeting on March 27, 2018. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Aye:Councilmember Cliff Long;Brianna Hinojosa-Flores;Councilmember Gary Roden;Councilmember Marvin Franklin;Councilmember Mark Hill and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 6 - City Manager Reports - Project Updates and Future Agendas11. City Manager Mike Land announced that the facilitator for the 2040Next Project will be selected at the Council meeting on March 27, 2018. Town Center Page 5City of Coppell, Texas February 27, 2018City Council Minutes Boulevard is open. The hump in the road is required by the ADA and will be striped as a crosswalk. Finally, there will be no Council meeting on March 13th due to Spring Break. Mayor and Council Reports12. a.Report by Mayor Hunt regarding upcoming elections. b.Report by Mayor Hunt regarding It’s Time Texas Community Challenge. c.Report by Mayor Hunt regarding the upcoming Spring Music Series. A. Mayor Hunt reported on upcoming elections: The Primary Election is March 6th. Early voting will be held through March 2nd. Coppell Town Center is both an early voting AND election day polling place. Registered voters may vote anywhere in their registered county during early voting. Check the City Secretary’s Election Page for more information on when and where to vote. B. Mayor Hunt announced we are still in 2nd Place. The Challenge continues through March 4th. Let’s show that Coppell is commited to healthy living by getting our friends and neighbors to register online at www.ittcommunitychallenge.com and to take pictures of doing something healthy or tracking our fitness. Coppell has won its category previously three years in a row. C. Mayor Hunt reported on the upcoming Spring Music Series: On Friday, March 9, 7 - 9 pm - The Wonderfuls will perform, on Friday, March 16, 7 - 9 pm - Raised Right Men will be performing. The events will be held in the Square at Old Town, 768 W. Main Street. Enjoy a night of music in Old Town under the stars. Bring your blanket or chairs and grab a bite to eat from local food trucks. Complimentary popcorn will be available courtesy of Coppell Parks and Recreation. More events can be found in the Event Guide on the City’s webpage at coppelltx.gov. Council Committee Reports concerning items of community involvement with no Council action or deliberation permitted. 13. a.Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition - Councilmember Gary Roden b.Metrocrest Community Clinic - Councilmember Mark Hill c.Metrocrest Services - Councilmembers Wes Mays and Marvin Franklin A. Councilmember Gary Roden gave an update for Dallas Regional Mobility Coalition. He reported that the focus of the Coalition is on LBJ, east of Central (IH75). The project is proposed as a "managed lane" road, which includes free lanes and express lanes that will cost the customer when used. There is currently a delay in the project due to the design. Some politicians would like to have the project completed with no express lanes included. More information to come. B. Councilmember Mark Hill reported that Metrocrest Community Clinic has rebranded to Woven Health Clinic. The Clinic will be expanding this year, but Page 6City of Coppell, Texas February 27, 2018City Council Minutes will be open for business during the expansion. The clinic hosted a "Walk-with-a-Doc" event in December and February. They will be sponsoring two more this year, on Saturday, May 19th and on September 8th in Coppell. Finally, the Clinic received the National Committee Quality Assurance recognition, as a patient-centered medical home. Fewer than one in six physician practices hold this recognition. C. Councilmember Marvin Franklin reported that Tracy Eubanks with Metrocrest Services will be addressing the Men's Group at First United Methodist Church on Saturday, March 24th. The 13th Annual Keyholder Breakfast will be held on March 29th at the Crown Plaza in Addison at 7:15 a.m., with all proceeds from the event staying local. On April 24th, Ms. Eubanks will be giving the annual report of activities and services provided to Coppell's residents. Finally, Councilmember Mays attended the Metrocrest Board meeting on January 24th and gave an update on City Council activities. Public Service Announcements concerning items of community interest with no Council action or deliberation permitted. 14. Nothing to report. Necessary Action from Executive Session15. Nothing to report.. Adjournment There being no further business before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. ________________________ Karen Selbo Hunt, Mayor _________________________________ Jean Dwinnell, Deputy City Secretary Page 7City of Coppell, Texas Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2017-3702 File ID: Type: Status: 2017-3702 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 4Version: Reference: In Control: Planning & Zoning Commission 12/11/2017File Created: Final Action: PD-292-SF-12 Coppell Middle School EastFile Name: Title: Consider approval of an Ordinance for PD-292-SF-12, Coppell Middle School East, a zoning change request from SF-12 (Single Family-12) to PD-292-SF-12 (Planned Development 292-SF-12) to allow the construction of a concession and restroom facility, bleachers, press box, parking and the addition of lighting for the existing track and football field, on 24.7 acres of property located at 400 Mockingbird Lane, at the request of Coppell Independent School District; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: B. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Cover Memo.pdf, Ordinance for PD 292-SF12 CMSE.pdf, Exhibit A - Legal Description.pdf, Exhibit B - Site Plan.pdf, Exhibit C - Bleachers (C-4 and C-4a).pdf, Exhibit D - Press Box (C-5).pdf, Exhibit E - Concession Building Elevations (C-6).pdf, Exhibit F - Field Lighting (C-7).pdf, Exhibit G - Photometric Study.pdf Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 4 Mindi Hurley 1 3/21/20183/20/2018 Approve 4 Christel Pettinos - FYI 2 3/20/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3702) 1 Pass01/18/2018Planning & Zoning Commission Postponed12/21/2017Planning & Zoning Commission Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3702) Ms. Diamond introduced the case with exhibits. Ms. Diamond stated that staff is recommending approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Additional comments will be generated at the time of detail engineering review of the grading, drainage, utility and paving plans. 2. Sheet C-6 being revised to define brick colors, correct the elevation directions, etc. 3. Insuring access to the concession/restroom facility are ADA compliant. 4. Revising the proposed parking lot layout to reduce the number of spaces on the south side to 15, and including a landscape buffer/hedgerow parallel to Falcon Lane. 5. Correct the height of the light fixtures to 70' on Sheets C-3 and C-3a to reflect the height as specified on the Photometric Study. 6. Correct the size of the concession/restroom facility in the table on Sheets C-3, C-3a and C-3b. 7. Include the location, size, height, etc. of the electronic score board. 8. Include additional information on the speaker system, type location, etc. 9. The additional details of the press box will be required at the time of permitting. Ms. Diamond noted that there were 95 notices sent within 200 feet. One was returned in favor of the agenda item and nine opposed. In addition, 363 courtesy notices were sent within 800 feet. Mr. Louis Macias, Coppell Independent School District, 200 S. Denton Tap Road, Coppell, Texas, 75019, was present to address questions and concerns from the commission. Mr. Macias stated that CISD would like to improve the field at CMSE to bring it up to the standards of the other two middle schools. Chairman Haas asked Ms. Diamond if there were any agreements regarding light or noise that were put into place around the time that the school was built, or the neighborhood was developed. Ms. Diamond stated that weren't any, but also stated that the city has requirements on glare and lighting and noise, those are city-wide requirements. Chairman Haas asked Mr. Macias about the lighting that is proposed in the application. Mr. Macias stated that CISD is proposing fixtures that are 70' tall to help with the shielding and the glare. Chairman Haas asked Mr. Macias if CISD has a projected number of events for that site. Mr. Macias stated that there will be 7 football games played at that facility. He stated he does not know how many other activities will go on at that facility. Chairman Haas asked if the lights will be on for early morning football practices. Mr. Macias stated that there are two banks of lights that are included in the proposed application. The bank on the east side could be used for the morning practices since those lights are pointed toward the school. Chairman Haas asked if the field will be used for band practices. Mr. Macias stated that the middle schools do not have marching bands, so they will not be using the field for practice. The band practices are held in the band hall. Chairman Haas asked Mr. Macias about the proposed speakers in the application. Mr. Macias stated that the speakers can be mounted on the press box, like the high school field. Chairman Haas asked Mr. Macias if facilities staff could erect two poles in front of, or to the side of, the bleachers and mount the speakers so that they are pointed right at the bleachers to prevent any sound carrying. Mr. Macias stated that it is possible and CISD would consider it. Chairman Haas asked about the 850-seat capacity of the proposed bleachers and if the bleachers at Coppell Middle School North have ever filled up. Mr. Macias stated that football games typically draw about 250 parents. Mr. Macias explained that manufactured bleachers come in sets, and they are installing the smallest selection of bleachers, which will seat 850 people. Chairman Haas asked if the field will have a scoreboard. Mr. Macias stated that there will be a scoreboard and it will be a very small, standard football field scoreboard. Action Text: Page 3City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3702) Chairman Haas stated that up until now, Coppell Middle School East home games were always played at Coppell Middle School West, which was an agreeable solution. Chairman Haas asked Mr. Macias about the possibility of the case not passing tonight, and what would the position be of CISD. Mr. Macias stated that CISD is committed to the renovations that were proposed and voted on in the 2013 bond package. CISD wants CMSE to be equitable to the other middle schools in Coppell. Commissioner Williford asked Mr. Macias if the proposed speakers will be used during football practice. Mr. Macias stated that they will not be used during practice. Commissioner Williford asked Mr. Macias if CISD would be opposed to an additional condition being that the speakers can only be used during football games. Mr. Macias stated that CISD would not be opposed to the additional condition. Commissioner Williford asked if there had been any discussion about citizens being able to use the track to walk and run. Mr. Macias stated that CISD recently had discussions with the city in regard to allowing citizens to use the track. A final decision has not been made. Commissioner Guerra asked Mr. Macias about CISD's efforts to engage the community and receive feedback from the residents in regard to this project. Mr. Macias stated that there is a bond oversight committee that is made up of residents that might meet once or twice a month. They represent their communities in disuccsion of CISD bond projects. Commissioner Guerra asked Mr. Macias if he has face-to-face meetings with concerned citizens, and Mr. Macias stated that he has an open-door policy and is always open to meet with citizens. Commissioner Blankenship asked what efforts were done to reach out to the community specifically about this project. Mr. Macias stated that the same process was practiced for this project. The project was communicated through the bond oversight committee. Commissioner Blankenship asked Mr. Macias when CISD will decide to do a noise study for the speaker system. Mr. Macias stated that CISD will produce the noise study at the time of permitting with the Building Inspections division. Chairman Haas asked Mr. Macias if there is a timetable on a decision to allow citizens to utilize the track. Mr. Macias stated that the involved parties are in the preliminary stages of coming to a decision. Chairman Haas asked how long this project would take to complete. Mr. Macias stated that they would like to complete the project in time for next school year's football season. CISD would like to get started as quickly as possible. Commissioner Guerra asked Mr. Macias to detail the concerns that he has been presented with from citizens regarding this project. Mr. Macias stated that he has only received concerns from city staff. Chairman Haas opened the Public Hearing. The following people spoke: David Novi, 313 Springoak Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019, spoke in opposition. Mike Downing, 325 Springoak Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019, spoke in opposition. Melba Downing, 325 Springoak Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019, spoke in opposition. Mike Souders, 309 Springoak Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019, spoke in opposition. Barbara Arwood, 825 Redcedar Way Drive, Coppell, TX, 75019, spoke in opposition. Scott Yocum, 324 Timber Ridge Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019, spoke in opposition. Robert Fix, 803 E. Bethel School Road, Coppell, TX, 75019, spoke in opposition. Robert Myers, 841 Redcedar Way, Coppell, TX, 75019, spoke in opposition. Darlene Grayson, 837 Redcedar Way, Coppell, TX, 75019, spoke in opposition. Judy Schlapper, 233 Creekside Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019, spoke in opposition. Kathy Vanderpol, 817 Falcon Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019, spoke in opposition. Kathy Vint, 228 Mockingbird Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019, was undecided. Denise Danby, 345 Springoak Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019, was undecided. Vickie McBride, 837 Falcon Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019, spoke in opposition. Page 4City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3702) James Reed, 363 Timber Ridge Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019, spoke in opposition. Greg Frnka, 721 Dove Circle, Coppell, TX, 75019, was undecided. The main citizen concerns were: Lighting disturbance Sound disturbance Drainage More time for input Trash Traffic/Parking Safety Kent Collins, Assistant Director of Engineering, responded to the nieghbor's concerns about drainage by explaining that the detention area is generally functioning as it should, however; additional grading and maintenance may be required. In response to the construction of a parking lot proposed over the existing drainage area along Falcon, it will basically require the connection of two pipes and filling in the ditch. The applicant will be required to submit detail engineering. In response to the question by Chairman Haas concerning addtional traffic generation, Mr. Collins stated that special event traffic normally does not require additional physical improvements (traffic calming). Chairman Haas asked Mr. Macias what CISD's position would be if the commission continued the agenda item. Mr. Macias stated that he would like the commission to vote on the agenda item and that CISD would take the necessary next steps. Discussion ensued between the commission about not having enough information to approve or deny the agenda item and the need to get feedback from the neighbors. A motion was made by Commissioner Williford, seconded by Chairman Haas, that this Public Hearing remain open and this agenda Item be continued to the January 18, 2018, Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. The motion carried (4-1). Aye: 4 - Chairman Haas, Vice Chairman Portman, Commissioner Guerra, and Commissioner Williford. Nay: 1 - Commissioner Blankenship. Chair Edmund Haas, Vice Chair Glenn Portman, Commissioner George Williford, and Commissioner Freddie Guerra 4Aye: Commissioner Sue Blankenship1Nay: 1 PassApproved01/18/2018Planning & Zoning Commission Page 5City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3702) Marcie Diamond, Assistant Director of Community Development/Planning, introduced the case with exhibits. This item was continued from the December 21, 2017, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting. She stated that she was informed that the City and CISD will not be entering into an Interlocal Agreement for joint use of the facilities. She explained that CISD held a Town Hall meeting at the Coppell Middle School East cafeteria on January 11th. There were approximately 150 citizens in attendance. CISD’s presentation noted that they had met with representatives of the neighborhood and based on those discussions, they are revising the proposal as follows: • Lower profile of bleachers & press box (remove film deck); seating not to exceed 300. • No Sunday activities for CISD or City use. • No lights or sound system after 9:00 PM. • Sound system at or less than 50 decibels at school property lines. • Parking expansion moved from Falcon Lane to area between Mockingbird Elementary and CMSE. • Restrooms & concession stand locked when not in use by CISD or City. • Allow for community use of track when not in use by CISD or City; could be restricted if property is damaged. • All of these restrictions will be detailed in the inter-local agreement between CISD and City. Ms. Diamond stated that the applicant revised exhibits and provided them to staff today. The revisions to the exhibits included: • the deletion of the proposed parking on Falcon Lane (Revised Site Plan) • the reconfiguration and expansion of the existing parking lot north of the middle school to have a net increase in of 43 parking spaces, (Revised Site Plan) • the revisions to the size of the bleachers to reflect 300 seats, and reduction of the height to 8’4”, and (Revised Site Plan and Bleachers Plan View and Sections) • the revised elevations of the press box to delete the fenced in film deck, reducing the overall height of bleachers and the press box to less than 20 feet. (Revised Press Box) Ms. Diamond stated that staff is recommending approval subject to the above listed revisions and to the following conditions: 1. Additional comments will be generated at the time detail engineering review of the grading, drainage, utility and paving plans. 2. Sheet C-6 being revised to define brick colors, correct the elevation directions, etc. 3. Insuring access to the concession/restroom facility are ADA complaint. 4. Correct the height of the light fixtures to 70’ on Sheets C-3 and C3a to reflect the height as specified on the Photometric Study. 5. Correct the size of the concession/restroom facility in the table on Sheets C-3, C-3a and C-3b. 6. Include the location, size, height, etc. of the electronic score board. 7. Include additional information on the speaker system, type location, etc. 8. The additional details of the press box will be required at the time of permitting. 9. Applicable plans shall be revised to reflect all conditions, as recommended. Ms. Diamond stated that as of 11:00 a.m. on January 12, 2018, the following written responses have been received: 37 in opposition within the 200-foot notification area 4 in favor within the 200-foot notification area 1 undecided within the 200-foot notification area 8 in opposition between the 201-800 foot notification area 0 in favor between the 201-800 foot notification area 4 in favor outside of 800 feet Louis Macias, CISD, 200 S. Denton Tap Road, Coppell, TX, 75019, was present to address questions and concerns from the commission. Action Text: Page 6City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3702) Chairman Haas asked what days the football games are played. Mr. Macias stated that they are played on Monday or Tuesday evenings. They typically start around 4:30 and end around 8:30 p.m. Mr. Macias stated that track events are held at the high school track. Chairman Haas asked about the possibility of a PTO meeting being held on the same night as a football game. Mr. Macias stated that school principals are required to be at football games, and it would be highly unlikely that a football game and a PTO meeting would be held on the same night. Chairman Haas asked about the field being lit during the morning hours. Mr. Macias stated that when the time changes, there is about an hour in the morning where the field will need to have some lights on. Mr. Macias informed the commission that the lighting system is completely automated, and the controls will not allow for the lights to be left on past 9 p.m. It is also possible for only one or two poles to be on in the morning instead of the entire system. Mr. Macias stated that the sound system will not be used during the morning practices. Chairman Haas asked how many people typically attend middle school football games. Mr. Macias stated that there might be around 150 to 200 people. Commissioner Guerra asked Mr. Macias how the CISD bond oversight committee was formed and what their role is. Mr. Macias stated that the committee is made up of community members and they are tasked with making sure the district completes what the community voted for. Commissioner Blankenship asked if the track was open to use by the residents. Mr. Macias stated that the track is open for use by the community. Chairman Haas asked those who were in favor to speak. The following people spoke: Jason Spoor, 735 Hawk Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019. Ellen Orr, 810 Mallard Drive, Coppell, TX, 75019. Stephanie Waddill, 914 Elmvale Court, TX, 75019. Cherie Walker, 400 Hawk Court, Coppell, TX, 75019. Candy Sheehan, 321 Quiet Valley, Coppell, TX, 75019. Craig Able, 1401 College Parkway, Lewisville, TX, 75019. Steve Mobley, 313 Dunlin Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019. Lisa Knowlton, 855 Pelican Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019. Tricia Sullivan, 953 Falcon Lane, Coppell, TX 75019. Lisa Pehl, 111 Winding Hollow Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019. Laura Springer, 344 Lakewood Court, Coppell, TX, 75019. Missy Yates, 204 Mockingbird Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019 The following people spoke in opposition: David Warner, 841 Falcon Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019. Melba Downing, 325 Springoak, Coppell, TX, 75019. Greg Frnka, 721 Dove Circle, Coppell, TX, 75019. Mike Wilcox, 910 Mallard Drive, Coppell, TX, 75019. Terry Danby, 345 Springoak Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019. Justin Smith, 833 Redcedar Way Drive, Coppell, TX, 75019. Bill Lamb, 548 Briarglen Drive, Coppell, TX, 75019. Kathleen Vent, 228 Mockingbird Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019. Doc Gibbs, 329 Springoak Lane, Coppell, TX, 75019. The main citizen concerns were the impact on their homes including: Lighting Disturbance Sound Disturbance Traffic/Parking Page 7City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3702) Chairman Haas closed the Public Hearing. The commission recessed at 8:40 for a break and reconvened at 8:48 p.m. Sid Grant, Associate Superintendent at CISD, 200 S. Denton Tap Road, Coppell, TX, 75019, was also present to address the citizens' and the commission's concerns. Commissioner Guerra asked what the long-term engagement plan will be for the neighbors after the facility renovations are completed. Mr. Grant stated that neighbors can email, access CISD website, or call staff directly to voice complaints. Commissioner Maurer asked if the number of events at the field could be limited to a certain number. Mr. Grant stated that the number will be generally limited to football and soccer events. Commissioner Blankenship asked Mr. Macias if the school can turn off the lighting system if a football game ends early. Mr. Macias stated that yes, they have the ability to turn the system off. Discussion ensued between the commission about concessions that CISD has brought forward as well as the conditions from staff. A motion was made by Commissioner Williford, seconded by Vice Chair Portman, to recommend approval of this agenda item with the conditions outlined by staff, additional conditions added by CISD as summarized below, and added that there should be additional landscape screening along the north and east property lines adjacent to the alley, and all field activities should be limited to CISD activities only. Conditions: 1. Additional comments will be generated at the time detail engineering review of the grading, drainage, utility and paving plans. 2. There will be additional comments on the revised parking layout as relocated between Mockingbird Elementary and CMSE. 3. Include the following notes on the exhibits, to be incorporated into the PD Ordinance: a. There shall be no Sunday activities for CISD use. b. The community shall be allowed to use track when not in use by CISD; could be restricted if property is damaged. c. The use of these facilities shall be limited to CISD only. 4. Concession Restroom Facility: a. Revise Sheet C-6 being to define brick colors, correct the elevation directions, etc. b. The concession/restroom facility will be ADA complaint. c. Restrooms & concession stand shall be locked when not in use by CISD. d. Correct the size of the concession/restroom facility in the table on Sheets C-3, C-3a and C-3b 5. Lighting: a. Correct the height of the light fixtures to 70’ on Sheets C-3 and C3a to reflect the height as specified on the Photometric Study. b. No lights after shall be permitted after 9:00 PM. c. Only lights on one side of the field shall be permitted in the morning. 6. Include the location, size, height, etc. of the electronic score board. 7. Speaker System: a. Include additional information on the speaker system, type location, etc. b. The sound system shall be 50 decibels or less at school property lines. c. The use of the sound system shall not be permitted prior to 8:00 a.m. d. The use of the sound system shall not be permitted after 9:00 p.m. in the evening, and shall only be used for games, and not practice. 8. Bleachers/Pressbox: a. The additional details of the press box will be required at the time of permitting. b. Revised profile of bleachers & press box (removed film deck) with seating not to exceed 300 (as Page 8City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3702) shown on the plans) 9. Landscaping/Screening a. Submit a landscape plan indicating additional screening (overstory trees) along the north and east property lines adjacent to the alley. The motion passed by unanimous vote. (7-0) Chair Edmund Haas, Vice Chair Glenn Portman, Commissioner Sue Blankenship, Commissioner Doug Robinson, Commissioner George Williford, Commissioner Freddie Guerra, and Commissioner Ed Maurer 7Aye: 3 PassClose the Public Hearing and Approve 02/13/2018City Council Page 9City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3702) Presentation: Marcie Diamond, Assistant Director of Planning, made a presentation to City Council. Mayor Hunt opened the Public Hearing and asked for those who signed up to speak in opposition of the item: 1) David Warner, 841 Falcon, was concerned with the extended light times and recommended they be limited to 7 p.m. for non-school activities. 2) Kathy Vanderpol, 817 Falcon, was concerned with the designation of operations and requested one entrance and gate. 3) Glen Wade, 918 Bitternut, had concerns with the traffic and requested a 7 p.m. light limitation. 4) Vickie McBride, 837 Falcon, was concerned with the reduced quality of life and negative impact on home values. She requested additional signage along Mockingbbird Ln. and Falcon Ln. and requested the relocation of the field entrance to be between the two schools. 5) Linda Bush, 825 Falcon, had concerns with the vagueness of the agreement and operational control of the lights. 6) Melba Downing, 325 Springoak, had concerns with the noise, Saturday usage and hours of lighting. 7) Mark Monse, 135 Mesquitewood, was concerned with the immediacy effects towards the homes. Mayor Hunt asked for those who signed up to speak in favor of the item: 1) Maureen Pranske, 761 Crane Circle, believed the lights were needed for the safety of the kids. 2) Jason Spore, 735 Hawk Ln., had his letter of support read into the record. 3) Ellen Ore, 810 Mallard, believes all students should have equal facilities and opportunities. 4) Stephanie Waddill, 914 Elmvale Ct., said the school is overcrowded and believes investments need to be made in the schools and neighborhoods. 5) Terry Zettle, 845 Falcon, believes the renovations will positively impact home values. 6) Candy Sheehan, 321 Quiet Valley, said Coppell has always been a community with neighborhood schools. She believes good relations between the the school and city need to continue and provide the youth with outdoor resources. 7) Kaylea Schultz, 150 Washington Ct., said numerous compromises have been made and believes kids need to have the ability to show their school pride by having home games. 8) Craig Able, 1401 College Pkwy., Lewsiville, spoke up for the kids. He said the students have 2,400 minutes less of practice in comparison to the other schools and thinks everyone should be allowed to enjoy home games. 9) Laura Springer, 344 Lakewood Ct., believes CMS East has waited their turn for renovations and the kids deserve this. Everyone will be affected, but it will be positive in the end. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling, seconded by Councilmember Marvin Franklin, to close the Public Hearing and approve this Agenda Item as read into the record by City Attorney Robert Hager, subject to the following conditions: 1) Additional comments will be generated at the time detail engineering review of the grading, drainage, utility and paving plans. 2) There will be additional comments on the revised parking layout as relocated between Mockingbird Elementary and CMSE. 3) Include additional information about the speaker system, type, location, etc. prior to the issuance of a permit. 4) A Detail Landscape Plan will be required prior to the installation of the overstory trees along the north and east property lines, as currently indicated on the Site Plan. The Detail Landscape Plan shall include the location of the existing trees and incorporate a combination of evergreen trees and shrubbery to obscure the view of the field from the adjacent homes. 5) No lights before 6:30 AM or after 9:00 PM. 6) Sound system at or less than 50 decibels at school property lines. 7) The use of the sound system shall not be permitted prior to 8:00 a.m. 8) The use of the sound system shall not be after 9:00 p.m. in the evening, and shall only be used for games, and not practice. 9) The use of these facilities shall be limited to CISD only. Action Text: Page 10City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3702) The following notes – be deleted from the Sheets C-3, C-3a and C-3b #1 There shall be no Sunday activities for CISD use. # 2 The community shall be allowed to use tract when not in use by CISD. # 9 Restrooms & Concession stand shall be locked when not in use by CISD. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Councilmember Cliff Long, Brianna Hinojosa-Flores, Councilmember Wes Mays, Councilmember Gary Roden, Councilmember Marvin Franklin, Councilmember Mark Hill, and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 7Aye: 4 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2017-3702 Title Consider approval of an Ordinance for PD-292-SF-12, Coppell Middle School East, a zoning change request from SF-12 (Single Family-12) to PD-292-SF-12 (Planned Development 292-SF-12) to allow the construction of a concession and restroom facility, bleachers, press box, parking and the addition of lighting for the existing track and football field, on 24.7 acres of property located at 400 Mockingbird Lane, at the request of Coppell Independent School District; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Summary Staff Recommendation: On February 13, 2018, the City Council, after another lengthy public hearing, by unanimous vote, approved the request subject to the deletion of various conditions relating to the operation of the facility, the following remaining conditions have been incorporating into this PD Ordinance: 1. Additional comments will be generated at the time detail engineering review of the grading, drainage, utility and paving plans. 2. There will be additional comments on the revised parking layout as relocated between Mockingbird Elementary and CMSE. 3. A Detail Landscape Plan shall be submitted prior to the installation of additional Live Oak trees along the north and east property lines, as currently indicated on the Site Plan. The Detail Landscape Plan shall include the location of the existing trees and incorporate a combination of evergreen trees and shrubbery to obscure the view of the field from the adjacent homes. 4. Additional details on the sound system (type, location, etc.) shall be submitted at the time of a building permit. a.The speaker system shall not produce sound exceeding 50 decibels at school property lines. b. The use of the sound system shall not be permitted prior to 8:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. in the evening, and shall only be used for games, and not practice. 5. The lighting of the track and football field shall not be permitted before 6:30 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. 6. The use of these facilities shall be limited to CISD athletic and extracurricular activities only. Page 11City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3702) The Planning Department recommends approval. Goal Icon: Community Wellness and Enrichment Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 12City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Mindi Hurley, Director of Community Development Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Consider approval of an Ordinance for PD-292-SF-12, Coppell Middle School East to allow the construction of a concession/restroom facility, bleachers, press box, parking and the addition of lighting for the existing track and football field, on 24.7 acres of property located at 400 Mockingbird Lane, and authorizing the Mayor to sign. 2030: Community Wellness and Enrichment, Sense of Community and Special Place to Live Executive Summary: Coppell Middle School East was constructed approximately 30 years ago and has not had significant changes to the exterior of the building or the athletic facilities since that time, except for the construction of tennis courts. In 2017, CISD improved the athletic field with artificial turf, added new goal posts and resurfaced the track. As part of that improvement project, the existing chain link fence was replaced with an eight-foot ornamental fence encircling the track and field. The second phase of this project will be to provide additional parking, bleachers, press box, concession/restroom facility and field lighting to be similar to the facilities at Coppell Middle School North and West. Introduction: On December 21, 2017, the Planning and Zoning Commission held this case under advisement until January 18, 2018, to allow the applicant time to address outstanding conditions and to meet with the neighborhood. CISD held a Town Hall meeting Coppell Middle School East on January 11th and proposed various conditions relating to the use of the field, hours of lighting, decibels of speakers, size of bleachers, etc. At the January 18, 2018, the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, CISD informed staff that there will not be an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Coppell. After a lengthy public hearing where approximately 50 residents spoke, both in favor and opposed to this rezoning request, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended APPROVAL subject to conditions which incorporated CISD’s, Planning and Zoning Commission’s and Staff’s recommended conditions. Analysis: On February 13, 2018, the City Council, after another lengthy public hearing, by unanimous vote, approved the request subject to the deletion of various conditions relating to the operation of the facility, the following remaining conditions have been incorporating into this PD Ordinance: 2 1. Additional comments will be generated at the time detail engineering review of the grading, drainage, utility and paving plans. 2. There will be additional comments on the revised parking layout as relocated between Mockingbird Elementary and CMSE. 3. A Detail Landscape Plan shall be submitted prior to the installation of additional Live Oak trees along the north and east property lines, as currently indicated on the Site Plan. The Detail Landscape Plan shall include the location of the existing trees and incorporate a combination of evergreen trees and shrubbery to obscure the view of the field from the adjacent homes. 4. Additional details on the sound system (type, location, etc.) shall be submitted at the time of a building permit. a. The speaker system shall not produce sound exceeding 50 decibels at school property lines. b. The use of the sound system shall not be permitted prior to 8:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. in the evening, and shall only be used for games, and not practice. 5. The lighting of the track and football field shall not be permitted before 6:30 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. 6. The use of these facilities shall be limited to CISD athletic and extracurricular activities only. Legal Review: The City Attorney reviewed this Ordinance Fiscal Impact: None Recommendation: The Planning Department recommends approval. Attachments: 1. Ordinance 2. Exhibit A - Legal Description 3. Exhibit B - Site Plan (C-3, C-3a and C-3b) 4. Exhibit C - Bleachers (C-4a and C-4b) 5. Exhibit D - Press Box (C-5) 6. Exhibit E - Concessions Building Elevations (C-6) 7. Exhibit F - Field Lighting (C-7) 8. Exhibit G - Photometric Study 1 TM 96811 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY GRANTING A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM SF-12 (SINGLE FAMILY-12) TO PD-292-SF- 12 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 292-SF-12) TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CONCESSION/RESTROOM FACILITY, BLEACHERS, PRESS BOX, PARKING AND THE ADDITION OF LIGHTING FOR THE EXISTING TRACK AND FOOTBALL FIELD ON 24.7 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 400 MOCKINGBIRD LANE, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT “A” ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE SITE PLAN (C-3, C-3A AND C-3B), BLEACHERS (C-4A AND C-4B), PRESS BOX (C-5), CONCESSION/ RESTROOM BUILDING ELEVATIONS (C-6), FIELD LIGHTING (C-7) AND PHOTOMETRIC STUDY , ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBITS “B”, “C”, “D”, “E”, “F” AND “G” RESPECTIVELY; PROVIDING DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; PROVIDING A REPEALING CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission and the governing body of the City of Coppell, Texas, in compliance with the laws of the State of Texas and pursuant to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, have given requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and after holding due hearings and affording a full and fair hearing to all property owners generally, and to all persons interested and situated in the affected area and in the vicinity thereof, the said governing body is of the opinion that Zoning Application No. PD-291-SF-12 should be approved, and in the exercise of legislative discretion have concluded that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map should be amended. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map of the City of Coppell, Texas, duly passed by the governing body of the City of Coppell, Texas, as heretofore amended, be and the same is hereby amended to grant a change in zoning from SF-12 (Single Family-12) to PD- 292-SF-12 (Planned Development 292-SF-12) to allow the construction of a concession/restroom 2 TM 96811 facility, bleachers, press box, parking and lighting for the existing track and football field, on 24.7 acres of property located at 400 Mockingbird Lane, and being more particularly described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes, subject to the development regulations. SECTION 2. That PD-291-SF-12 is hereby approved subject to the following development regulations: 1. A Detail Landscape Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to the installation of Live Oak trees along the north and east property lines, as currently provided on the Site Plan. The Detail Landscape Plan shall include the location and type of the existing trees and additional plant materials to include a combination of evergreen trees and shrubbery on the northern and eastern perimeter of the property to screen the view of the field from the adjacent homes. 2. That the concession/restroom facility and bleachers shall be located and constructed in compliance with the plans, development and materials as provided Exhibit B – Site Plan, (Sheets C-3, C-3a and C-3b), Exhibit C-Bleachers (Sheets C-4a and C-4b), Exhibit D - Press Box (Sheet C-5), and Exhibit E-Concession/Restroom Building Elevations (Sheet C- 6)3. The use of the outdoor sound system shall not be permitted prior to 8:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. and shall only be used for athletic competitions and not practice. a. Additional performance details on the outdoor sound system (type, location, etc.) shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development at the time of a building permit. b. The sound system including speakers and projection elements shall not produce sound exceeding 50 decibels as measured from the perimeter of the property. 4. The lighting of the track and football field shall be constructed in conformance with the equipment, grid summary, illumination summary, lighting system and light level summary 3 TM 96811 as set forth in in Exhibits ‘F’ and ‘G’, pages 1-6 and shall not be permitted before 6:30 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. 5. The use of these facilities shall be limited to CISD athletic and extracurricular uses only. 6. Compliance with engineering comments at the time of the grading, drainage, utility and paving plan review. 7. Compliance with additional Planning and Engineering comments on the revised parking layout as indicated the Exhibit B-Site Plan prior to the issuance of permits. SECTION 3. That the Exhibit B - Site Plan (Sheets C-3, C-3a and C-3b), Exhibit C - Bleachers (Sheets C-4a and C-4b), Exhibit D - Press Box ( Sheet C-5), Exhibit E- Concession/Restroom Building Elevations, Exhibit F - Field Lighting (Sheet C-6), Photometric Study (Exhibit G) shall be development regulations and are attached hereto and are made a part hereof for all purposes, and hereby approved as development regulations. SECTION 4. That the above property shall be used only in the manner and for the purpose provided for by the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, as heretofore amended, and as amended herein. SECTION 5. That the development of the property herein shall be in accordance with building regulations, zoning ordinances, and any applicable ordinances except as may be specifically altered or amended herein. SECTION 6. That all provisions of the Ordinances of the City of Coppell, Texas, in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same are hereby, repealed, and all other provisions not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 7. That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof other than the part so decided 4 TM 96811 to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, and shall not affec t the validity of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as a whole. SECTION 8. An offense committed before the effective date of this ordinance is governed by prior law and the provisions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, as amended, in effect when the offense was committed and the former law is continued in effect for this purpose. SECTION 9. That any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions or terms of this ordinance shall be subject to the same penalty as provided for in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, as heretofore amended, and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine not to exceed the sum of Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense; and each and every day such violation shall continue shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense. SECTION 10. That this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage and the publication of its caption, as the law and charter in such cases provide. DULY PASSED by the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas, this the _______ day of ___________________, 2018. APPROVED: _____________________________________ KAREN SELBO HUNT, MAYOR ATTEST: _____________________________________ CHRISTEL PETTINOS, CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________ CITY ATTORNEY AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY GRANTING A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM SF-12 (SINGLE FAMILY- 12) TO PD-292-SF-12 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 292-SF-12) TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CONCESSION/RESTROOM FACILITY, BLEACHERS, PRESS BOX, PARKING AND THE ADDITION OF LIGHTING FOR THE EXISTING TRACK AND FOOTBALL FIELD ON 24.7 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 400 MOCKINGBIRD LANE, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT “A” ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE. SITE PLAN (C-3, C-3A AND C-3B), BLEACHERS (C-4A AND C- 4B), PRESS BOX (C-5), CONCESSION/ RESTROOM BUILDING ELEVATIONS (C-6), FIELD LIGHTING (C-7) AND PHOTOMETRIC STUDY ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBITS “B”, “C”, “D”, “E”, “F” AND “G” RESPECTIVELY; PROVIDING DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; PROVIDING A REPEALING CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. DULY PASSED by the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas, this the _______ day of ___________________, 2018. APPROVED: _____________________________________ KAREN SELBO HUNT, MAYOR ATTEST: _____________________________________ CHRISTEL PETTINOS, CITY SECRETARY Legal Description Exhibit “A” VOLUME 84051 PAGE 235360.83'S 9°28'45" ECONCRETE PADTELEPHONELENGTH = 217.35'RADIUS = 605.00'DELTA = 20°35'00"LENGTH = 787.06'RADIUS = 772.42'DELTA = 58°22'54"LENGTH = 813.05'RADIUS = 1170.00'DELTA = 39°48'57"878.78'S 00°44'04" W7.97'S 00°01'01" E946.98'S 89°15'23" EN 00°01'01" W6.52'125.00'N 89°58'59" E355.77'N 37°48'55" WTV-PEDHEADWALLSTORMINLETTELE.PEDTRANS.PADTELE.PEDCHORD = 216.18'CH. BRG. = N 10°16'35" EN 08°37'28" WCH. BRG. = CHORD = 753.45'CHORD = 796.79'CH. BRG. = S 71°21'43" W2122232425262728293031321589101110112122232411( 60' RIGHT-OF-WAY )9VOLUME 81180 PAGE 3301 ( 50' RIGHT-OF-WAY )( 50' RIGHT-OF-WAY )( 50' RIGHT-OF-WAY )TRAFFICSIGNTEL.PEDTRAFFICSIGNTRAFFICSIGNS 01°10'00" W 151.68' S E T 1 / 2 " I R O N R O D SET 1/2" IRON RODFND "X" IN CONC.SET 1/2" IRON RODFND 1/2" IRON RODFND 1/2" IRON RODSET 1/2" IRON ROD1/2" IRON ROD SET T R A N S . P A DPLAYGROUNDS T R E E T D ED I C A T IO N VO L UM E 8 4 1 1 3 P AG E 2 2 7 3 STREET DEDICATIONVOLUME 84113 PAGE 22732345678910212223ELEMENTARY75,500 S.FBUILDINGSCHOOLXXXX484.53 INSIDE EDGE 485.00 OUTSIDE EDGE TRACKSTSTST ST ST STWALK-THRU GATEEXISTINGEXISTING FENCESTSTSTSTSTST EX 27"R C P EX 21"RCP EX 30"RCPEX.PPEXISTING SANITARY SEWER485.00 OUTSIDE EDGE TRACK 484.53 INSIDE EDGE EXISTINGCOURTSTENNISEX 10' CHAIN LINKTENNIS COURT FENCENEWCONCESSIONSBUILDINGFF 494.001,620 SQUARE FEETGATEGATEEXISTING 10'EASEMENTMIDDLEEXISTING NON SPRINKLEDBUILDINGSCHOOLEXISTINGPROPOSED PARK ING XXXX X X XGATE 25' B U I L D I N G L I N E 15' BUILDING LINEEXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGSIDEWALK245.9'299.7'59.3'27.3'EXISTINGSIDEWALK168.2'129.2' 15' BUILDING LINE 133.3'174.6'18.0'24.0'18.0'6.0'24.0'6.0'49.7'77.0'9 . 8 ' 1 8 . 0 ' 2 2 . 0 ' 1 8 . 0 ' 5 . 0 ' 8 6 . 9 ' 1 0 5 . 8 '24.5'26.0'18.0'17.8'20.5'416.4'344.9'EXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGHARDSURFACEPLAYEXIST ING F IRE LANE EXIST ING F IRE LANEEXIST ING F IRE LANE EXISTING FIRELANEEXISTING FIRELANEEXISTING FIR E LANE E X I S T I N G F I R E L A N E EXISTING FIRELANE2018 RENO - FULLY SPRINKLED2" WATER FROMEXISTING BUILDINGSANITARY SEWERMAN HOLETOP = 481.138" FL = 470.80 E/W8" FL = 470.08 SELECTRIC FROMEXISTING BUILDINGNEWTRANS.PADNEWTRANSFORMEREXISTING 30" RCPSTORM SEWER PIPENEW ELECTRICSERVICE TO LIGHTSAND PRESS BOX.NEW 6" SANITARYSEWER LATERAL(PRIVATE)EX INLET5.0% MAX 2.0%EX.FHEX.FHEX.FDC ONWALL50.6'FUTURE PARK ING 19.0'MIDDLEBUILDINGSCHOOLEXISTING227.0'60.0' X X X X X X X X 23.8'118.2'1 3 2 1 5 2 1 918.5'24.3'18.0'18.0'24.0'18.5'14.4'50.0' 50.0'50.0' SYNTHETIC TURF FIELDEX. 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCEEX. 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCEEX. 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCEEX. 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCENEW 300 SEATBLEACHERSNEW 70'LIGHT POLENEW 70'LIGHT POLENEW 70'LIGHT POLENEW 70'LIGHT POLENEW 5' SIDEWALKNEW 5' SIDEWALKNEW SIDEWALKNEW SIDEWALKNEW PRESS BOXNEW 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCENEW 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCERELOCATE 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCE AROUNDNEW BLEACHER PADRELOCATE 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCE AROUNDNEW BLEACHER PAD18' x 10' SCORE BOARD16' HIGHLIVE OAKEX. 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCELIVE OAKLIVE OAKLIVE OAKLIVE OAKEX. 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCEEXISTING DETENTION PONDCOPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST - TRACK SURFACE AND FIELD TURF REPLACEMENT - BB #47615 COPPELL, TEXAS COPPELL ISD - BUSINESS OFFICE 31303 WRANGLER CIRCLE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 ATTN: SID GRANT PROJECT ADDRESS: COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST 400 MOCKINGBIRD LANE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 Plotted: Feb 4, 2018, 10:13 AM by user: robert - Saved: 2/4/2018 by user: robert D:\Public\Bob's Projects\COPPELL\COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST\2017 TRACK AND TURF\BIDSET\2017 MOCK CITY SITE PLAN REV2.dwg 12 12/11/17 City Comments3 01/30/18 P and Z Comments SITE PLAN C3601200Scale 1" = 60'SITE DATA SUMMARY TABLEZONINGSF-12USEMIDDLE AND ELEMENTARY SCHOOLLOT AREA24.722 ACRES OR 1,076,917 SFSETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK 50'SIDE YARD SETBACK 30' STREETBACK YARD SETBACK 30' SETBACKPARKING TABULATIONSRECONFIGURED PARKING LOT ONLY PARKING PROVIDED =VISITOR/STAFF REGULAR(9.0' x 18.0')8543NET ADD PARKING PROVIDED =VISITOR/STAFF REGULARPROPOSED RECONFIGURED EXISTING-76PARKING PROVIDED =VISITOR/STAFF REGULAR34PROPOSED NEW (9.0' x 18.0')119TOTAL NEW AND RECONFIGURED PARKING LOT 33333333LIVE OAK= 3" LIVE OAKS 50' ON CENTERBUILDING AREA (NEW TOTAL) PROPOSED CONCESSIONS BUILDING 1,620 SF EXISTING MIDDLE SCHOOL138,000 SF EXISTING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 75,400 SFTOTAL BUILDING AREA214,970 SFBUILDING COVERAGE (FAR)20.0%3Refer to PD Conditions incorporated in the OrdiananceExhibit B 1 of 3 878.78'S 00°44'04" W946.98'S 89°15'23" E125.00'N 89°58'59" E212223242526272829303132FND 1/2" IRON RODFND 1/2" IRON RODSET 1/2" IRON RODT R A N S . P A DPLAYGROUND ELEMENTARY75,500 S.FBUILDINGSCHOOLXXXXXXX484.53 INSIDE EDGE 485.00 OUTSIDE EDGE TRACK WALK-THRU GATEEXISTINGEXISTING FENCEEX.PPEXISTING SANITARY SEWER485.00 OUTSIDE EDGE TRACK 484.53 INSIDE EDGE NEWCONCESSIONSBUILDINGFF 494.001,620 SQUARE FEETGATEGATEEXISTING 10'EASEMENTPROPOSED PARK ING XXXXXX X X X X XGATE 15' BUILDING LINEEXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGSIDEWALK245.9'59.3'27.3'EXISTINGSIDEWALK168.2'129.2' 133.3'174.6'18.0'24.0'18.0'6.0'24.0'6.0'24.5'26.0'416.4'344.9'EXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGHARDSURFACEPLAYEXIST ING F IRE LANE EXIST ING F IRE LANE EXISTING FIRELANEEXISTING FIRELANE2" WATER FROMEXISTING BUILDINGSANITARY SEWERMAN HOLETOP = 481.138" FL = 470.80 E/W8" FL = 470.08 SELECTRIC FROMEXISTING BUILDINGNEWTRANS.PADNEWTRANSFORMEREXISTING 30" RCPSTORM SEWER PIPENEW ELECTRICSERVICE TO LIGHTSAND PRESS BOX.NEW 6" SANITARYSEWER LATERAL(PRIVATE)EX INLET5.0% MAX 2.0%EX.FDC ONWALL50.6'FUTURE PARK ING MIDDLEBUILDINGSCHOOLEXISTING227.0'60.0'XX X X X X X X X X X X X X23.8'118.2'1 3 2 1 5 2 1 918.5'24.3'18.0'18.0'24.0'18.5'14.4'50.0'50.0' SYNTHETIC TURF FIELDEX. 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCEEX. 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCEEX. 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCEEX. 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCENEW 300 SEATBLEACHERSNEW 70'LIGHT POLENEW 70'LIGHT POLENEW 70'LIGHT POLENEW 70'LIGHT POLENEW 5' SIDEWALKNEW 5' SIDEWALKNEW SIDEWALKNEW SIDEWALKNEW PRESS BOXNEW 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCENEW 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCERELOCATE 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCE AROUNDNEW BLEACHER PADRELOCATE 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCE AROUNDNEW BLEACHER PAD18' x 10' SCORE BOARD16' HIGHLIVE OAKEX. 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCELIVE OAKLIVE OAKLIVE OAKEX. 8' ORNAMENTALMETAL FENCEEXISTING DETENTION PONDCOPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST - TRACK SURFACE AND FIELD TURF REPLACEMENT - BB #47615 COPPELL, TEXAS COPPELL ISD - BUSINESS OFFICE 31303 WRANGLER CIRCLE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 ATTN: SID GRANT PROJECT ADDRESS: COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST 400 MOCKINGBIRD LANE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 Plotted: Feb 4, 2018, 10:11 AM by user: robert - Saved: 2/4/2018 by user: robert D:\Public\Bob's Projects\COPPELL\COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST\2017 TRACK AND TURF\BIDSET\2017 MOCK CITY SITE PLAN REV2.dwg 12 12/11/17 City Comments3 01/30/18 P and Z Comments ENLARGED SITE PLAN C3aSITE DATA SUMMARY TABLEZONINGSF-12USEMIDDLE AND ELEMENTARY SCHOOLLOT AREA24.722 ACRES OR 1,076,917 SFSETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK 50'SIDE YARD SETBACK 30' STREETBACK YARD SETBACK 30' SETBACK40800Scale 1" = 40'M A T C H L I N E33333333LIVE OAK= 3" LIVE OAKS 50' ON CENTER333BUILDING AREA (NEW TOTAL) PROPOSED CONCESSIONS BUILDING 1,620 SF EXISTING MIDDLE SCHOOL138,000 SF EXISTING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 75,400 SFTOTAL BUILDING AREA214,970 SFBUILDING COVERAGE (FAR)20.0%3Refer to PD Conditions incorporated in the OrdiananceExhibit B 2 of 3 LENGTH = 813.05'RADIUS = 1170.00'DELTA = 39°48'57"355.77'CHORD = 796.79'CH. BRG. = S 71°21'43" W321S 01°10'00" W 151.68' S E T 1 / 2 " I R O N R O D FND "X" IN CONC.SET 1/2" IRON RODS T R E E T D ED I C A T IO N VO L UM E 8 4 1 1 3 P AG E 2 2 7 3 2345678910212223242526EX 30"RCPEXISTINGCOURTSTENNISEX 10' CHAIN LINKTENNIS COURT FENCEMIDDLEEXISTING NON SPRINKLEDBUILDINGSCHOOLEXISTINGEXISTINGSIDEWALK299.7'15' BUILDING LINE49.7'77.0'9 . 8 ' 1 8 . 0 ' 2 2 . 0 ' 1 8 . 0 ' 5 . 0 ' 8 6 . 9 ' 1 0 5 . 8 '24.5'18.0'17.8'20.5'EXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTING FIRELANEEXISTING FIR E LANE 2018 RENO - FULLY SPRINKLEDEXISTING BUILDING19.0'50.0'LIVE OAKCOPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST - TRACK SURFACE AND FIELD TURF REPLACEMENT - BB #47615 COPPELL, TEXAS COPPELL ISD - BUSINESS OFFICE 31303 WRANGLER CIRCLE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 ATTN: SID GRANT PROJECT ADDRESS: COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST 400 MOCKINGBIRD LANE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 Plotted: Feb 4, 2018, 10:11 AM by user: robert - Saved: 2/4/2018 by user: robert D:\Public\Bob's Projects\COPPELL\COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST\2017 TRACK AND TURF\BIDSET\2017 MOCK CITY SITE PLAN REV2.dwg 12 12/11/17 City Comments3 01/30/18 P and Z CommentsC3bSITE DATA SUMMARY TABLEZONINGSF-12USEMIDDLE AND ELEMENTARY SCHOOLLOT AREA24.722 ACRES OR 1,076,917 SFSETBACKFRONT YARD SETBACK 50'SIDE YARD SETBACK 30' STREETBACK YARD SETBACK 30' SETBACKBUILDING AREA (NEW TOTAL) PROPOSED CONCESSIONS BUILDING 1,620 SF EXISTING MIDDLE SCHOOL138,000 SF EXISTING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 75,400 SFTOTAL BUILDING AREA214,970 SFBUILDING COVERAGE (FAR)20.0%40800Scale 1" = 40'ENLARGED SITE PLAN-SOUTH M A T C H L I N ELIVE OAK= 3" LIVE OAKS 50' ON CENTER3Refer to PD Conditions incorporated in the OrdiananceExhibit B 3 of 3 COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST - TRACK SURFACE AND FIELD TURF REPLACEMENT - BB #47615 COPPELL, TEXAS COPPELL ISD - BUSINESS OFFICE 31303 WRANGLER CIRCLE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 ATTN: SID GRANT PROJECT ADDRESS: COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST 400 MOCKINGBIRD LANE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 Plotted: Feb 2, 2018, 10:19 AM by user: robert - Saved: 2/2/2018 by user: robert D:\Public\Bob's Projects\COPPELL\COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST\2017 TRACK AND TURF\PDFs\P ANS Z COMMENTS\2017 MOCK CITY SITE PLAN REV2.dwg 12 12/11/17 City Comments3 01/30/18 P and Z Comments ALUMINUM BLEACHERS C4ALUMINUM BLEACHERSScale NTSTHIS SHEET IS FOR REFERENCE ONLYExhibit C 1 of 2 COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST - TRACK SURFACE AND FIELD TURF REPLACEMENT - BB #47615 COPPELL, TEXAS COPPELL ISD - BUSINESS OFFICE 31303 WRANGLER CIRCLE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 ATTN: SID GRANT PROJECT ADDRESS: COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST 400 MOCKINGBIRD LANE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 Plotted: Feb 2, 2018, 10:19 AM by user: robert - Saved: 2/2/2018 by user: robert D:\Public\Bob's Projects\COPPELL\COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST\2017 TRACK AND TURF\PDFs\P ANS Z COMMENTS\2017 MOCK CITY SITE PLAN REV2.dwg 12 12/11/17 City Comments3 01/30/18 P and Z Comments ALUMINUM BLEACHERS C4AALUMINUM BLEACHERS - PLAN VIEWScale NTSTHIS SHEET IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY3Exhibit C 2 of 2 COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST - TRACK SURFACE AND FIELD TURF REPLACEMENT - BB #47615 COPPELL, TEXAS COPPELL ISD - BUSINESS OFFICE 31303 WRANGLER CIRCLE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 ATTN: SID GRANT PROJECT ADDRESS: COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST 400 MOCKINGBIRD LANE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 Plotted: Feb 2, 2018, 10:19 AM by user: robert - Saved: 2/2/2018 by user: robert D:\Public\Bob's Projects\COPPELL\COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST\2017 TRACK AND TURF\PDFs\P ANS Z COMMENTS\2017 MOCK CITY SITE PLAN REV2.dwg 12 12/11/17 City Comments3 01/30/18 P and Z Comments PRESS BOX C5PRESS BOXNTSTHIS SHEET IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY3Exhibit D COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST - TRACK SURFACE AND FIELD TURF REPLACEMENT - BB #47615 COPPELL, TEXAS COPPELL ISD - BUSINESS OFFICE 31303 WRANGLER CIRCLE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 ATTN: SID GRANT PROJECT ADDRESS: COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST 400 MOCKINGBIRD LANE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 Plotted: Feb 2, 2018, 10:19 AM by user: robert - Saved: 2/2/2018 by user: robert D:\Public\Bob's Projects\COPPELL\COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST\2017 TRACK AND TURF\PDFs\P ANS Z COMMENTS\2017 MOCK CITY SITE PLAN REV2.dwg 12 12/11/17 City Comments3 01/30/18 P and Z Comments CONCESSIONS BUILDING ELEVATIONS C6CONCESSIONS BUILDING - NORTH ELEVATIONNTSTHIS SHEET IS FOR REFERENCE ONLYCONCESSIONS BUILDING - EAST ELEVATIONNTSCONCESSIONS BUILDING - WEST ELEVATIONNTSCONCESSIONS BUILDING - SOUTH ELEVATIONNTSCONCESSIONS BUILDING - COLOR SCHEDULENTSCONCESSIONS BUILDING - COLOR SCHEDULENTS54.75'27.3'FLOOR PLANNTS1,620 SQUARE FEETMATCH EXISTINGRESTROOMFOYER3BK1 FIELDBK2 ACCENT3333BK1 FIELDBK2 ACCENTMATCH EXISTING3SITE RESTRICTIONS .a.Brick Color shall match existing middle school building.33b.The concession/restroom facility shall be be ADA complaint..3Exhibit E COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST - TRACK SURFACE AND FIELD TURF REPLACEMENT - BB #47615 COPPELL, TEXAS COPPELL ISD - BUSINESS OFFICE 31303 WRANGLER CIRCLE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 ATTN: SID GRANT PROJECT ADDRESS: COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST 400 MOCKINGBIRD LANE COPPELL, TEXAS 75019 Plotted: Feb 2, 2018, 10:19 AM by user: robert - Saved: 2/2/2018 by user: robert D:\Public\Bob's Projects\COPPELL\COPPELL MIDDLE SCHOOL EAST\2017 TRACK AND TURF\PDFs\P ANS Z COMMENTS\2017 MOCK CITY SITE PLAN REV2.dwg 12 12/11/17 City Comments3 01/30/18 P and Z Comments FIELD LIGHTING C7THIS SHEET IS FOR REFERENCE ONLYBLEACHER LIGHTING (CURTSEY)NTSExhibit F Exhibit G 1 of 6 Exhibit G 2 of 6 Exhibit G 3 of 6 Exhibit G 4 of 6 Exhibit G 5 of 6 Exhibit G 6 of 6 Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3745 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3745 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 3Version: Reference: In Control: Planning & Zoning Commission 01/08/2018File Created: Final Action: PD-294-C, Alpine WashFile Name: Title: Consider approval of an Ordinance for Case No. PD-294-C, Alpine Wash, White Glove Express Addition, Lot 1R1, Block A, a zoning change request from S-1074RR-C (Special Use Permit-1074 Revision 2-Commercial) to PD-294-C (Planned Development District-294-Commercial) to amend the Detail Site Plan to allow the renovation and expansion of existing car wash facility to include self-service vacuums on 1.020 acres on property located at 250 S. Denton Tap Road; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: C. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Cover Memo.pdf, Ordinance.pdf, Exhibit A - Legal Description.pdf, Exhibit B - Site Plan.pdf, Exhibit C - Landcape Plan and Tree Survey.pdf, Exhibit D - Building Elevations.pdf, Exhibit E - Signage.pdf Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 3 Mindi Hurley 1 3/21/20183/20/2018 Approve 3 Christel Pettinos - FYI 2 3/20/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 PassApproved01/18/2018Planning & Zoning Commission Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3745) Mary Paron-Boswell, Senior Planner, introduced the case with exhibits. Ms. Paron-Boswell stated that staff is recommending approval subject to the following conditions: 1. There may be additional comments during the site plan review. 2. A replat will be required to relocate the fire lane on the property. 3. All proposed signage shall comply with ordinance requirements. 4. The vacuum operation shall be fully enclosed and vacuum stanchions shall be inoperable when the car wash is closed. 5. The existing landscaping along the western property line shall be maintained and enhanced if necessary. 6. Hours of operation be limited to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Ms. Paron-Boswell stated that as of January 18, 2018, the following written responses have been received: 1 in favor within the 200-foot notification area 1 undecided between the 201-800 foot notification area Chairman Haas asked Ms. Paron-Boswell where the location of the vacuum motors will be placed. Ms. Paron-Boswell stated that the vacuum motors will be placed inside the building. Randy Brown, Dallas, Texas, was present to address questions and concerns from the commission. Commissioner Blankenship asked how many cars will the stacking hold. Mr. Brown stated that the stacking could hold 10 and 12 cars. Chairman Haas opened the Public Hearing and advised that no one signed up to speak and no one wished to speak. Chairman Haas closed the Public Hearing. A motion was made by Commissioner Robinson, seconded by Vice Chairman Portman, to recommend approval of this agenda item with the conditions presented by staff. The motion passed by unanimous vote. (7-0) Action Text: Chair Edmund Haas, Vice Chair Glenn Portman, Commissioner Sue Blankenship, Commissioner Doug Robinson, Commissioner George Williford, Commissioner Freddie Guerra, and Commissioner Ed Maurer 7Aye: 2 PassClose the Public Hearing and Approve 02/13/2018City Council Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3745) Presentation: Mary Paron-Boswell, Planner, made a presentation to the City Council. Mayor Hunt opened the Public Hearing and advised that no one signed up to speak. Trent Clark, representing the applicant, was available for questions of the City Council. A motion was made by Councilmember Marvin Franklin, seconded by Councilmember Gary Roden, to close the Public Hearing and approve this Agenda Item subject to the following conditions: 1) There may be additional comments during the site plan review; 2) A replat will be required to relocate the fire lane on the property; 3) All proposed signage shall comply with ordinance requirements; 4) The vacuum operation shall be fully enclosed and vacuum stanchions shall be inoperable when the car wash is closed; 5) The existing landscaping along the western property line shall be maintained and enhanced if necessary; and 6) Hours of operation be limited to 7 a.m to 7 p.m. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Action Text: Councilmember Cliff Long, Brianna Hinojosa-Flores, Councilmember Wes Mays, Councilmember Gary Roden, Councilmember Marvin Franklin, Councilmember Mark Hill, and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 7Aye: 3 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3745 Title Consider approval of an Ordinance for Case No. PD-294-C, Alpine Wash, White Glove Express Addition, Lot 1R1, Block A, a zoning change request from S-1074RR-C (Special Use Permit-1074 Revision 2-Commercial) to PD-294-C (Planned Development District-294-Commercial) to amend the Detail Site Plan to allow the renovation and expansion of existing car wash facility to include self-service vacuums on 1.020 acres on property located at 250 S. Denton Tap Road; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Summary Staff Recommendation: On February 13, 2018, by unanimous vote, City Council approved this Planned Development District, subject to the Planning and Zoning Conditions, which have been incorporated into the Ordinance. On January 18, 2018, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of PD-294-C Alpine Car Wash, with the following conditions: 1. There may be additional comments during the site plan review. 2. A replat will be required to relocate the fire lane on the property. 3. All proposed signage shall comply with ordinance requirements. 4. The vacuum operation shall be fully enclosed and vacuum stanchions shall be inoperable when the car wash is closed. 5. The existing landscaping along the western property line shall be maintained and enhanced if necessary. Page 3City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3745) 6. Hours of operation be limited to 7 a.m to 7 p.m. The Planning Department recommends approval. Goal Icon: Business Prosperity Page 4City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Mindi Hurley, Director of Community Development Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Consider approval of an Ordinance for PD-294-C (Planned Development District-294- Commercial) to amend the Detail Site Plan to allow the renovation and expansion of existing car wash facility to include self-service vacuums on 1.020 acres on property located at 250 S. Denton Tap, and authorizing the Mayor to sign. 2030: Business Prosperity Executive Summary: The request is to allow the renovation and expansion of the existing car wash facility to include 15 self- service vacuums. Introduction: The existing car wash was approved in 1993 and currently operates as a full-service car wash. The prospective owners propose to convert the facility into a state of the art express car wash. This would entail replacing the existing facility’s equipment with modern equipment and the addition of 15 new vacuuming stalls. The facility is proposed to be open daily from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. The existing site has very limited landscaping. The proposed changes to the site include increasing the landscaping to 30% of the lot area. The exterior façade will be updated to include additional stone on the front façade with split- face block wainscoting and a new metal roof and awnings and be architecturally compatible with the recently renovated oil change center to the south. Analysis: On February 13, 2018, by unanimous vote, City Council approved this Planned Development District, subject to the Planning and Zoning Conditions, which have been incorporated into the Ordinance. On January 18, 2018, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of PD-294-C Alpine Car Wash, with the following conditions: 1. There may be additional comments during the site plan review. 2. A replat will be required to relocate the fire lane on the property. 3. All proposed signage shall comply with ordinance requirements. 4. The vacuum operation shall be fully enclosed and vacuum stanchions shall be inoperable when the car wash is closed. 5. The existing landscaping along the western property line shall be maintained and enhanced if necessary. 2 6. Hours of operation be limited to 7 a.m to 7 p.m. Legal Review: The City Attorney reviewed this Ordinance Fiscal Impact: None Recommendation: The Planning Department recommends approval. Attachments: 1. Ordinance 2. Exhibit A – Legal Description 3. Exhibit B - Site Plan 4. Exhibit C - Landscape Plan & Tree Survey 5. Exhibit D - Elevations 6. Exhibit E - Signage 1 TM 96836 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY GRANTING A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM S-1074RR-C (SPECIAL USE PERMIT-1074 REVISION 2- COMMERCIAL) TO PD-294-C (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT-294-COMMERCIAL) TO AMEND THE DETAIL SITE PLAN TO ALLOW THE RENOVATION AND EXPANSION OF EXISTING CAR WASH FACILITY TO INCLUDE SELF-SERVICE VACUUMS ON 1.020 ACRES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 250 S. DENTON TAP, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT “A” ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE SITE PLAN, LANDSCAPE PLAN & TREE SURVEY, ELEVATIONS AND SIGNAGE ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBITS “B”, “C”, “D” AND “E” RESPECTIVELY; PROVIDING DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; PROVIDING A REPEALING CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission and the governing body of the City of Coppell, Texas, in compliance with the laws of the State of Texas and pursuant to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, have given requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and after holding due hearings and affording a full and fair hearing to all property owners generally, and to all persons interested and situated in the affected area and in the vicinity thereof, the said governing body is of the opinion that Zoning Application No. PD-294-C should be approved, and in the exercise of legislative discretion have concluded that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map should be amended. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map of the City of Coppell, Texas, duly passed by the governing body of the City of Coppell, Texas, as heretofore amended, be and the same is hereby amended to grant a change in zoning from S-1074RR-C (Special Use Permit-1074 Revision 2- Commercial) to PD-294-C (Planned Development District-294-Commercial) to amend the Detail Site Plan to allow the renovation and expansion of existing car wash facility to include self-service vacuums on 1.020 acres on property located at 250 S. Denton Tap, and being more 2 TM 96836 particularly described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes, subject to the development regulations. SECTION 2. That PD-294-C is hereby approved subject to the following development regulations: A. A replat will be required to relocate the fire lane on the property prior to the issuance of a building permit in accordance with current subdivision regulations. B. All proposed signage shall be in compliance of current sign provisions of the Code of Ordinances. C. The vacuum operation shall be fully enclosed as depicted on Exhibit “D” and vacuum stanchions shall be inoperable during non-business hours. D. The existing landscaping along the property line shall be maintained and enhanced as depicted on the Landscape Plan and Tree Survey, Exhibit “C”. E. Hours of operation be shall not exceed to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. seven days a week, SECTION 3. That Site Plan, Landscape Plan & Tree Survey, Elevations and Signage, and comments notes and materials noted therein, respectively, attached hereto as Exhibits “B”, “C”, “D” and “E” are made a part hereof for all purposes, and hereby approved. SECTION 4. That the above property shall be used only in the manner and for the purpose provided for by the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, as heretofore amended, and as amended herein. SECTION 5. That the development of the property herein shall be in accordance with building regulations, zoning ordinances, and any applicable ordinances except as may be specifically altered or amended herein. SECTION 6. That all provisions of the Ordinances of the City of Coppell, Texas, in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same are hereby, repealed, and all other provisions not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 7. 3 TM 96836 That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, and shall not affect the validity of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as a whole. SECTION 8. An offense committed before the effective date of this ordinance is governed by prior law and the provisions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, as amended, in effect when the offense was committed and the former law is continued in effect for this purpose. SECTION 9. That any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions or terms of this ordinance shall be subject to the same penalty as provided for in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, as heretofore amended, and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine not to exceed the sum of Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense; and each and every day such violation shall continue shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense. SECTION 10. That this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage and the publication of its caption, as the law and charter in such cases provide. DULY PASSED by the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas, this the _______ day of ___________________, 2018. APPROVED: _____________________________________ KAREN SELBO HUNT, MAYOR ATTEST: _____________________________________ CHRISTEL PETTINOS, CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________ CITY ATTORNEY EXHIBIT “A” LEGAL DESCRIPTION Being all of Lot 1R1, Block A of the White Glove Express Addition, being an addition to the City of Coppell, Dallas County, Texas, situated in the Edward A. Crow Survey, Abstract No. 307, Dallas County Texas, and containing 1.020 acres. EXITONLYEXISTINGDUMPSTERENTERONLYEXITONLYENTERONLYEXITONLYEXITONLYEXISTING CAR WASH TUNNELEXISTING BUILDINGCASHIERCANOPY6 VACUUM BAYS9 VACUUM BAYS DUMPSTERLEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR250 SOUTH DENTON TAP ROADAMENDED SPECIAL USE PLANBEING ALL OF THAT CERTAIN LOT 1R1, BLOCK A OFTHE WHITE GLOVE EXPRESS ADDITION LOCATED INTHE EDWARD A. CROW SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 307,DALLAS COUNTY , TEXAS ACCORDING TO THE REPLATFILED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 200600361899 OFTHE PLAT RECORDS OF DALLAS COUNTY, DALLASCOUNTY, TEXAS AND CONTAINING 1.020 ACRES.ZONE - PD-294-CBUILDING INFORMATION:EXISTING CAR WASHBUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE - 5190 S.F.BUILDING HEIGHT - 31'-4"SITE AREA = 44,437 SFLANDSCAPE AREA PROVIDED = 11,531 SF ( 25.9%)IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE = 32,906 SFPARKING:REQUIRED - 5 (OCCUPIED SPACE = 2,469 SF @1 PER 500 SF)PROVIDED - 51.02 ACRESDENTON TAP ROAD VACUUMEQUIPMENTA1.1ARCHITECTURALSITE PLANSCALE: 1"=20'N4SITE PLANNORTHNo. DATEREVISIONSDrawn by:Checked by:Project No.DateNOTE972-724-4440972-691-7731 FAXCONSTRUCTIONINTERIORSARCHITECTUREAPDG.USA PLUS DESIGNGROUPC COPYRIGHT A PLUS DESIGN GROUP 2017PRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONTrent W. Clark, ArchitectTX Registration # 17084These Drawings areincomplete and may not beused for regulatory approval,permit, or construction.ALPINE WASH ZONE - PD-294-C LOT 1R1, Block A of the White Glove Express Addition 250 S Denton Tap Rd, Coppell, TX 75019 Exhibit B Scale 1" = 20' 10'40'20'0' PLANTING LEGEND LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS TOTAL SITE AREA:44,437 SF INTERIOR LANDSCAPE AREA REQUIRED:4,444 SF (10% OF GROSS SITE AREA) INTERIOR LANDSCAPE AREA PROVIDED:11,302 SF (25.4%) PERIMETER LANDSCAPE PERIMETER LENGTH:1,115 LF TREES REQUIRED:23 TREES (1 TREE PER 50 LF) TREES PROVIDED:27 TREES (25 EXISTING, 2 PROPOSED) NON-VEHICULAR OPEN SPACE SUBJECT AREA, MINUS FOOTPRINT:44,437 - 5,300 = 39,137 SF OPEN SPACE REQUIRED:5,871 SF (15% OF LOT, EXCLUDING BUILDING FOOTPRINT) OPEN SPACE PROVIDED:11,302 SF (28.9%) TREES REQUIRED:5 TREES (1 TREE PER 2,500 SF) TREES PROVIDED:10 TREES (EXISTING) NOTE: ALL TREES SHALL BE CONTAINER-GROWN, CONTAINER SIZE AS APPROPRIATE FOR THE CALIPER SPECIFIED. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR PROPER ROOT QUALITY. - - -- - -- - -SodSpecies to match existing TURF AND SEED GENERAL PLANTING NOTES AFTER ALL PLANTING IS COMPLETE, CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL 3" THICK LAYER OF 1-1/2" SHREDDED WOOD MULCH IN ALL PLANTING AREAS (EXCEPT FOR TURF AND SEEDED AREAS). CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLES OF ALL MULCHES TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND OWNER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. ABSOLUTELY NO EXPOSED GROUND SHALL BE LEFT SHOWING ANYWHERE ON THE PROJECT AFTER MULCH HAS BEEN INSTALLED. MULCHES 1.THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVING ALL EXISTING VEGETATION (EXCEPT WHERE NOTED TO REMAIN). BEFORE STARTING WORK, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THAT THE GRADE OF ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS ARE WITHIN +/-0.1' OF FINISH GRADE. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE OWNER IMMEDIATELY SHOULD ANY DISCREPANCIES EXIST. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR MORE DETAILED INSTRUCTION ON TURF AREA AND PLANTING BED PREPARATION. 2.CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN FINISH GRADES IN LANDSCAPE AREAS AS SHOWN ON GRADING PLANS, AND CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN SLOPES AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL HAVE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM STRUCTURES AT THE MINIMUM SLOPE SPECIFIED IN THE REPORT, AND AREAS OF POTENTIAL PONDING SHALL BE REGRADED TO BLEND IN WITH THE SURROUNDING GRADES AND ELIMINATE PONDING POTENTIAL. SHOULD ANY CONFLICTS AND/OR DISCREPANCIES ARISE BETWEEN THE GRADING PLANS, GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, THESE NOTES, AND ACTUAL CONDITIONS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY BRING SUCH ITEMS TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, GENERAL CONTRACTOR, AND OWNER. 3.ENSURE THAT THE GRADE IN SHRUB AREAS SHALL BE 2" BELOW FINISH GRADE AFTER INSTALLING SOIL AMENDMENTS, AND 1" BELOW FINISH GRADE IN SOD AREAS AFTER INSTALLING SOIL AMENDMENTS. MULCH COVER WITHIN 6" OF CONCRETE WALKS AND CURBS SHALL NOT PROTRUDE ABOVE THE FINISH SURFACE OF THE WALKS AND CURBS. MULCH COVER WITHIN 12" OF WALLS SHALL BE AT LEAST 3" LOWER THAN THE TOP OF WALL. 4.INSTALL MULCH TOPDRESSING, TYPE AND DEPTH PER MULCH NOTE, IN ALL PLANTING BEDS AND TREE RINGS. DO NOT INSTALL MULCH WITHIN 6" OF TREE ROOT FLARE. 5.INSTALL 14G, GREEN STEEL EDGING BETWEEN ALL PLANTING BEDS AND TURF AREAS, AND BETWEEN GROUNDCOVERS AND OTHER PLANTS (WHERE INDICATED ON THE PLAN). 6.HYDROMULCH ALL DISTURBED AREAS OUTSIDE OF PROPERTY LIMITS (UNLESS SHOWN AS SOD). 7.ALL PLANT LOCATIONS ARE DIAGRAMMATIC. ACTUAL LOCATIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR DESIGNER PRIOR TO PLANTING. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE PERMITTING AUTHORITY ARE MET (I.E., MINIMUM PLANT QUANTITIES, PLANTING METHODS, TREE PROTECTION METHODS, ETC.). 8.THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING PLANT QUANTITIES; PLANT QUANTITIES SHOWN ON LEGENDS AND CALLOUTS ARE FOR GENERAL INFORMATION ONLY. IN THE EVENT OF A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE PLAN AND THE PLANT LEGEND, THE PLANT QUANTITY AS SHOWN ON THE PLAN (FOR INDIVIDUAL SYMBOLS) OR CALLOUT (FOR GROUNDCOVER PATTERNS) SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE. 9.NO SUBSTITUTIONS OF PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE ALLOWED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. IF SOME OF THE PLANTS ARE NOT AVAILABLE, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IN WRITING (VIA PROPER CHANNELS). 10. PLANTS MAY BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED OR REJECTED ON THE JOBSITE BY THE OWNER OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. 11. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF ALL WORK SHOWN ON THESE PLANS FOR 90 DAYS BEYOND FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF ALL LANDSCAPE WORK BY THE OWNER. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SHALL INCLUDE WEEKLY SITE VISITS FOR THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS (AS APPROPRIATE): PROPER PRUNING, RESTAKING OF TREES, RESETTING OF PLANTS THAT HAVE SETTLED, MOWING AND AERATION OF LAWNS, WEEDING, RESEEDING AREAS WHICH HAVE NOT GERMINATED WELL, TREATING FOR INSECTS AND DISEASES,REPLACEMENT OF MULCH, REMOVAL OF LITTER, REPAIRS TO THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM DUE TO FAULTY PARTS AND/OR WORKMANSHIP, AND THE APPROPRIATE WATERING OF ALL PLANTINGS. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN PROPER WORKING ORDER, WITH SCHEDULING ADJUSTMENTS BY SEASON TO MAXIMIZE WATER CONSERVATION. 12. SHOULD SEEDED AND/OR SODDED AREAS NOT BE COVERED BY AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHAL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR WATERING THESE AREAS AND OBTAINING A FULL STAND OF GRASS AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. 13. TO ACHIEVE FINAL ACCEPTANCE AT THE END OF THE MAINTENANCE PERIOD, ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MUST OCCUR: A. THE LANDSCAPE SHALL SHOW ACTIVE, HEALTHY GROWTH (WITH EXCEPTIONS MADE FOR SEASONAL DORMANCY). ALL PLANTS NOT MEETING THIS CONDITION SHALL BE REJECTED AND REPLACED BY HEALTHY PLANT MATERIAL PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE. B.ALL HARDSCAPE SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE. C. SODDED AREAS MUST BE ACTIVELY GROWING AND MUST REACH A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 1 1/2 INCHES BEFORE FIRST MOWING. HYDROMULCHED AREAS SHALL SHOW ACTIVE, HEALTHY GROWTH. BARE AREAS LARGER THAN TWELVE SQUARE INCHES MUST BE RESODDED OR RESEEDED (AS APPROPRIATE) PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE. ALL SODDED TURF SHALL BE NEATLY MOWED. 14. SEE SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAILS FOR FURTHER REQUIREMENTS. No. DATE REVISIONS Drawn by: Checked by: Project No. Date NOTE 972-724-4440 972-691-7731 FAX CONSTRUCTION INTERIORS ARCHITECTURE APDG.US A PLUS DESIGN GROUP C COPYRIGHT A PLUS DESIGN GROUP 2017 ST A TE O F T E XASLP-1(800) 680-6630 15305 Dallas Pkwy., Ste 300 Addison, TX 75001 www.landscape-consultants.net D E S I G N G R O U P Celebrating 10 Years 1/5/2018 ALPINE WASHZONE - PD-294-CLOT 1R1, Block A of theWhite Glove Express Addition250 S Denton Tap Rd, Coppell, TX 75019 PLANTING PLAN EXISTING TREES - PROTECT IN PLACE (TYP.) EXISTING SHRUBS - PROTECT IN PLACE (TYP.) EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED (TYP.) EXISTING BRICK FENCE TO REMAIN (TYP.) PROPOSED BRICK FENCE EXTENSION (BY OTHERS) 2Per planLive OakQuercus virginianaQUVI SPACING QUANTITY REMARKS/DETAILSSIZESYMBOL SHRUBS BOTANIC NAME COMMON NAME TREES 3" cal. 9#1 cont.6' o.c.Wilton JuniperJuniperus horizontalis 'Wiltonii'JUWI ORNAMENTAL GRASSES AND PERENNIALS PAVI Panicum virgatum 'Prairie Sky'Prairie Sky Switchgrass 3' o.c.6#1 cont. #1 cont.323' o.c.Gulf MuhlyMuhlenbergia capillarisMUCA PHFR Phlomis fruticosa Jerusalem Sage 3' o.c.24#1 cont. #1 cont.82' o.c.Blue Oat GrassHelictotrichon sempervirensHESE 47#5 cont.3' o.c.Dwarf Yaupon HollyIlex vomitoria 'Nana'ILVO 12'-14' high min. INSTALL TURF WHERE EXISTING TURF IS DAMAGED BY CONSTRUCTION (TYP.) #1 cont.601' o.c.Moonshine YarrowAchillea 'Moonshine'ACMO EXISTING SCREENING SHRUBS TO REMAIN (TYP.) 3 ILVO 5 MUCA 8 PHFR 7 MUCA 3 MUCA 13 ILVO 6 JUWI 5 PHFR 3 PAVI 6 PHFR 30 ACMO 5 MUCA 3 HESE 5 HESE 5 PHFR 10 ILVO 1 QUVI 2 PHFR 7 ILVO 4 ILVO 5 MUCA 30 ACMO 1 QUVI 2 MUCA 4 ILVO 2 MUCA 3 JUWI 6 ILVO EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN (TYP.) SEE TREE SURVEY FOR EXISTING TREE AND MITIGATION INFORMATION. EXISTING TREES 3 MUCA 3 ULCR (M) 3Per planCedar ElmUlmus crassifoliaULCR 3" cal.12'-14' high min.; mitigation 3 PAVI Exhibit C 1 of 3 PLANT SPACING SCALE: NTSC 4 X 2X 3 2 1 5 6 7 4 1 2 3 SHRUB, PERENNIAL, OR ORNAMENTAL GRASS. MULCH, TYPE AND DEPTH PER PLANS. PLACE NO MORE THAN 1" OF MULCH WITHIN 6" OF PLANT CENTER. FINISH GRADE. BACKFILL. AMEND AND FERTILIZE ONLY AS RECOMMENDED IN SOIL FERTILITY ANALYSIS. ROOT BALL. UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL. 3" HIGH EARTHEN WATERING BASIN. 5 6 7 SHRUB AND PERENNIAL PLANTING SCALE: NTSB PLANTING SPECIFICATIONS FINISH GRADE.4 4 3 2 1 NOTES: 1) INSTALL EDGING SO THAT STAKES WILL BE ON INSIDE OF PLANTING BED. 2) BOTTOM OF EDGING SHALL BE BURIED A MINIMUM OF 1" BELOW FINISH GRADE. 3) TOP OF MULCH SHALL BE 1" LOWER THAN TOP OF EDGING. MULCH, TYPE AND DEPTH PER PLANS.3 TAPERED STEEL STAKES.2 ROLLED-TOP STEEL EDGING PER PLANS.1 D SCALE: NOT TO SCALE STEEL EDGING TURF (WHERE SHOWN ON PLAN).4 PLANT.3 MULCH LAYER.2 CURB.1 1 432 OF MATURE CANOPY 24" MIN. TO EDGE DISTANCE PER PLAN E SCALE: NOT TO SCALE PLANTING AT PARKING AREA TREE PLANTING SCALE: NOT TO SCALEA PLANT CENTER (TYP.)EQUALEQUALEQUALEDGE OF PLANTING AREA EQUAL NOTE: ALL PLANTS SHALL BE PLANTED AT EQUAL TRIANGULAR SPACING (EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN ON PLANS AS INFORMAL GROUPINGS). REFER TO PLANT LEGEND FOR SPACING DISTANCE BETWEEN PLANTS. 1) STEP 1: DETERMINE TOTAL PLANTS FOR THE AREA WITH THE FOLLOWING FORMULA: TOTAL AREA / AREA DIVIDER = TOTAL PLANTS PLANT SPACING AREA DIVIDER PLANT SPACING AREA DIVIDER 6"0.22 18"1.95 8"0.39 24"3.46 10"0.60 30"5.41 12"0.87 36"7.79 15"1.35 2) STEP 2: SUBTRACT THE ROW (S) OF PLANTS THAT WOULD OCCUR AT THE EDGE OF THE PLANTED AREA WITH THE FOLLOWING FORMULA: TOTAL PERIMETER LENGTH / PLANT SPACING = TOTAL PLANT SUBTRACTION EXAMPLE: PLANTS AT 18" O.C. IN 100 SF PLANTING AREA, 40 LF PERIMETER STEP 1: 100 SF/1.95 = 51 PLANTS STEP 2: 51 PLANTS - (40 LF / 1.95 = 21 PLANTS) = 30 PLANTS TOTAL GENERAL A.QUALIFICATIONS OF LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR 1.ALL LANDSCAPE WORK SHOWN ON THESE PLANS SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A SINGLE FIRM SPECIALIZING IN LANDSCAPE PLANTING. 2.A LIST OF SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED PROJECTS OF THIS TYPE, SIZE AND NATURE MAY BE REQUESTED BY THE OWNER FOR FURTHER QUALIFICATION MEASURES. 3.THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL HOLD A VALID NURSERY AND FLORAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, AS WELL AS OPERATE UNDER A COMMERCIAL PESTICIDE APPLICATOR LICENSE ISSUED BY EITHER THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE OR THE TEXAS STRUCTURAL PEST CONTROL BOARD. B.SCOPE OF WORK 1.WORK COVERED BY THESE SECTIONS INCLUDES THE FURNISHING AND PAYMENT OF ALL MATERIALS, LABOR, SERVICES, EQUIPMENT, LICENSES, TAXES AND ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE NECESSARY FOR THE EXECUTION, INSTALLATION AND COMPLETION OF ALL WORK, SPECIFIED HEREIN AND / OR SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPE PLANS, NOTES, AND DETAILS. 2.ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE LAWS, CODES AND REGULATIONS REQUIRED BY AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH WORK, INCLUDING ALL INSPECTIONS AND PERMITS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN SUPPLY, TRANSPORTATION AND INSTALLATION OF MATERIALS. 3.THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES (WATER, SEWER, ELECTRICAL, TELEPHONE, GAS, CABLE, TELEVISION, ETC.) PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY WORK. PRODUCTS A.ALL MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS SHALL BE NEW. B.CONTAINER AND BALLED-AND-BURLAPPED PLANTS: 1.FURNISH NURSERY-GROWN PLANTS COMPLYING WITH ANSI Z60.1-2014. PROVIDE WELL-SHAPED, FULLY BRANCHED, HEALTHY, VIGOROUS STOCK FREE OF DISEASE, INSECTS, EGGS, LARVAE, AND DEFECTS SUCH AS KNOTS, SUN SCALD, INJURIES, ABRASIONS, AND DISFIGUREMENT. ALL PLANTS WITHIN A SPECIES SHALL HAVE SIMILAR SIZE, AND SHALL BE OF A FORM TYPICAL FOR THE SPECIES. ALL TREES SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM SOURCES WITHIN 200 MILES OF THE PROJECT SITE, AND WITH SIMILAR CLIMACTIC CONDITIONS. 2.ROOT SYSTEMS SHALL BE HEALTHY, DENSELY BRANCHED ROOT SYSTEMS, NON-POT-BOUND, FREE FROM ENCIRCLING AND/OR GIRDLING ROOTS, AND FREE FROM ANY OTHER ROOT DEFECTS (SUCH AS J-SHAPED ROOTS). 3.ANY PLANT DEEMED UNACCEPTABLE BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR OWNER SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY REMOVED FROM THE SITE AND SHALL BE REPLACED WITH AN ACCEPTBLE PLANT OF LIKE TYPE AND SIZE AT THE CONTRACTOR'S OWN EXPENSE. ANY PLANTS APPEARING TO BE UNHEALTHY, EVEN IF DETERMINED TO STILL BE ALIVE, SHALL NOT BE ACCEPTED. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND OWNER SHALL BE THE SOLE JUDGES AS TO THE ACCEPTABILITY OF PLANT MATERIAL. 4.ALL TREES SHALL BE STANDARD IN FORM, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. TREES WITH CENTRAL LEADERS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF LEADER IS DAMAGED OR REMOVED. PRUNE ALL DAMAGED TWIGS AFTER PLANTING. 5.CALIPER MEASUREMENTS FOR STANDARD (SINGLE TRUNK) TREES SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: SIX INCHES ABOVE THE ROOT FLARE FOR TREES UP TO AND INCLUDING FOUR INCHES IN CALIPER, AND TWELVE INCHES ABOVE THE ROOT FLARE FOR TREES EXCEEDING FOUR INCHES IN CALIPER. 6.MULTI-TRUNK TREES SHALL BE MEASURED BY THEIR OVERALL HEIGHT, MEASURED FROM THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL. 7.ANY TREE OR SHRUB SHOWN TO HAVE EXCESS SOIL PLACED ON TOP OF THE ROOT BALL, SO THAT THE ROOT FLARE HAS BEEN COMPLETELY COVERED, SHALL BE REJECTED. C.SOD: PROVIDE WELL-ROOTED SOD OF THE VARIETY NOTED ON THE PLANS. SOD SHALL BE CUT FROM HEALTHY, MATURE TURF WITH SOIL THICKNESS OF 3/4" TO 1". EACH PALLET OF SOD SHALL BE ACCOMPANIED BY A CERTIFICATE FROM SUPPLIER STATING THE COMPOSITION OF THE SOD. D.SEED: PROVIDE BLEND OF SPECIES AND VARIETIES AS NOTED ON THE PLANS, WITH MAXIMUM PERCENTAGES OF PURITY, GERMINATION, AND MINIMUM PERCENTAGE OF WEED SEED AS INDICATED ON PLANS. EACH BAG OF SEED SHALL BE ACCOMPANIED BY A TAG FROM THE SUPPLIER INDICATING THE COMPOSITION OF THE SEED. E.TOPSOIL: SANDY TO CLAY LOAM TOPSOIL, FREE OF STONES LARGER THAN ½ INCH, FOREIGN MATTER, PLANTS, ROOTS, AND SEEDS. F.COMPOST: WELL-COMPOSTED, STABLE, AND WEED-FREE ORGANIC MATTER, pH RANGE OF 5.5 TO 8; MOISTURE CONTENT 35 TO 55 PERCENT BY WEIGHT; 100 PERCENT PASSING THROUGH 3/4-INCH SIEVE; SOLUBLE SALT CONTENT OF 5 TO 10 DECISIEMENS/M; NOT EXCEEDING 0.5 PERCENT INERT CONTAMINANTS AND FREE OF SUBSTANCES TOXIC TO PLANTINGS. NO MANURE OR ANIMAL-BASED PRODUCTS SHALL BE USED. G.FERTILIZER: GRANULAR FERTILIZER CONSISTING OF NITROGEN, PHOSPHORUS, POTASSIUM, AND OTHER NUTRIENTS IN PROPORTIONS, AMOUNTS, AND RELEASE RATES RECOMMENDED IN A SOIL REPORT FROM A QUALIFIED SOIL-TESTING AGENCY (SEE BELOW). H.MULCH: SIZE AND TYPE AS INDICATED ON PLANS, FREE FROM DELETERIOUS MATERIALS AND SUITABLE AS A TOP DRESSING OF TREES AND SHRUBS. I.WEED FABRIC: 5 OUNCE, WOVEN, NEEDLE-PUNCHED FABRIC, SUCH AS DEWITT PRO5 LANDSCAPE FABRIC (OR APPROVED EQUAL). J.TREE STAKING AND GUYING 1.STAKES: 6' LONG GREEN METAL T-POSTS. 2.GUY AND TIE WIRE: ASTM A 641, CLASS 1, GALVANIZED-STEEL WIRE, 2-STRAND, TWISTED, 0.106 INCH DIAMETER. 3.STRAP CHAFING GUARD: REINFORCED NYLON OR CANVAS AT LEAST 1-1/2 INCH WIDE, WITH GROMMETS TO PROTECT TREE TRUNKS FROM DAMAGE. K.STEEL EDGING: PROFESSIONAL STEEL EDGING, 14 GAUGE THICK X 4 INCHES WIDE, FACTORY PAINTED DARK GREEN. ACCEPTABLE MANUFACTURERS INCLUDE COL-MET OR APPROVED EQUAL. L.PRE-EMERGENT HERBICIDES: ANY GRANULAR, NON-STAINING PRE-EMERGENT HERBICIDE THAT IS LABELED FOR THE SPECIFIC ORNAMENTALS OR TURF ON WHICH IT WILL BE UTILIZED. PRE-EMERGENT HERBICIDES SHALL BE APPLIED PER THE MANUFACTURER'S LABELED RATES. METHODS A.SOIL PREPARATION 1.BEFORE STARTING WORK, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THAT THE GRADE OF ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS ARE WITHIN +/-0.1' OF FINISH GRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE OWNER IMMEDIATELY SHOULD ANY DISCREPANCIES EXIST. 2.SOIL TESTING: a.AFTER FINISH GRADES HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED, CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE SOIL SAMPLES TESTED BY AN ESTABLISHED SOIL TESTING LABORATORY FOR THE FOLLOWING: SOIL TEXTURAL CLASS, GENERAL SOIL FERTILITY, pH, ORGANIC MATTER CONTENT, SALT (CEC), LIME, SODIUM ADSORPTION RATIO (SAR) AND BORON CONTENT. EACH SAMPLE SUBMITTED SHALL CONTAIN NO LESS THAN ONE QUART OF SOIL. b.CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO SUBMIT THE PROJECT'S PLANT LIST TO THE LABORATORY ALONG WITH THE SOIL SAMPLES. c.THE SOIL REPORT PRODUCED BY THE LABORATORY SHALL CONTAIN RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FOLLOWING (AS APPROPRIATE): GENERAL SOIL PREPARATION AND BACKFILL MIXES, PRE-PLANT FERTILIZER APPLICATIONS, AND ANY OTHER SOIL RELATED ISSUES. THE REPORT SHALL ALSO PROVIDE A FERTILIZER PROGRAM FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT PERIOD AND FOR LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE. 3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL SOIL AMENDMENTS AND FERTILIZERS PER THE SOILS REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS. ANY CHANGE IN COST DUE TO THE SOIL REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS, EITHER INCREASE OR DECREASE, SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER WITH THE REPORT. 4.FOR BIDDING PURPOSES ONLY, THE SOIL PREPARATION SHALL CONSIST OF THE FOLLOWING: a.TURF: INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS INTO THE TOP 8" OF SOIL BY MEANS OF ROTOTILLING AFTER CROSS-RIPPING: i.NITROGEN STABILIZED ORGANIC AMENDMENT - 4 CU. YDS. PER 1,000 S.F. ii.AMMONIUM PHOSPHATE 16-20-0 - 15 LBS PER 1,000 S.F. iii.AGRICULTURAL GYPSUM - 100 LBS PER 1,000 S.F. b.TREES, SHRUBS, AND PERENNIALS: INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS INTO THE TOP 8" OF SOIL BY MEANS OF ROTOTILLING AFTER CROSS-RIPPING: i.NITROGEN STABILIZED ORGANIC AMENDMENT - 4 CU. YDS. PER 1,000 S.F. ii.12-12-12 FERTILIZER - 10 LBS. PER CU. YD. iii.AGRICULTURAL GYPSUM - 10 LBS. PER CU. YD. iv.IRON SULPHATE - 2 LBS. PER CU. YD. 5.CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT THE GRADE IN SOD AREAS SHALL BE 1" BELOW FINISH GRADE BEFORE INSTALLING SOIL AMENDMENTS, AND 2" BELOW FINISH GRADE IN SHRUB AREAS BEFORE INSTALLING SOIL AMENDMENTS. MULCH COVER WITHIN 6" OF CONCRETE WALKS AND CURBS SHALL NOT PROTRUDE ABOVE THE FINISH SURFACE OF THE WALKS AND CURBS. MULCH COVER WITHIN 12" OF WALLS SHALL BE AT LEAST 3" LOWER THAN THE TOP OF WALL. 6.ONCE SOIL PREPARATION IS COMPLETE, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT THERE ARE NO DEBRIS, TRASH, OR STONES LARGER THAN 1" REMAINING IN THE TOP 6" OF SOIL. B.GENERAL PLANTING 1.REMOVE ALL NURSERY TAGS AND STAKES FROM PLANTS. 2.EXCEPT IN AREAS TO BE PLANTED WITH ORNAMENTAL GRASSES, APPLY PRE-EMERGENT HERBICIDES AT THE MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDED RATE. 3.TRENCHING NEAR EXISTING TREES: a.CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT DISTURB ROOTS 1-1/2" AND LARGER IN DIAMETER WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE (CRZ) OF EXISTING TREES, AND SHALL EXERCISE ALL POSSIBLE CARE AND PRECAUTIONS TO AVOID INJURY TO TREE ROOTS, TRUNKS, AND BRANCHES. THE CRZ IS DEFINED AS A CIRCULAR AREA EXTENDING OUTWARD FROM THE TREE TRUNK, WITH A RADIUS EQUAL TO 1' FOR EVERY 1" OF TRUNK DIAMETER-AT-BREAST-HEIGHT (4.5' ABOVE THE AVERAGE GRADE AT THE TRUNK). b.ALL EXCAVATION WITHIN THE CRZ SHALL BE PERFORMED USING HAND TOOLS. NO MACHINE EXCAVATION OR TRENCHING OF ANY KIND SHALL BE ALLOWED WITHIN THE CRZ. c.ALTER ALIGNMENT OF PIPE TO AVOID TREE ROOTS 1-1/2" AND LARGER IN DIAMETER. WHERE TREE ROOTS 1-1/2" AND LARGER IN DIAMETER ARE ENCOUNTERED IN THE FIELD, TUNNEL UNDER SUCH ROOTS. WRAP EXPOSED ROOTS WITH SEVERAL LAYERS OF BURLAP AND KEEP MOIST. CLOSE ALL TRENCHES WITHIN THE CANOPY DRIP LINES WITHIN 24 HOURS. d.ALL SEVERED ROOTS SHALL BE HAND PRUNED WITH SHARP TOOLS AND ALLOWED TO AIR-DRY. DO NOT USE ANY SORT OF SEALERS OR WOUND PAINTS. C.TREE PLANTING 1.TREE PLANTING HOLES SHALL BE EXCAVATED TO MINIMUM WIDTH OF TWO TIMES THE WIDTH OF THE ROOTBALL, AND TO A DEPTH EQUAL TO THE DEPTH OF THE ROOTBALL LESS TWO TO FOUR INCHES. 2.SCARIFY THE SIDES AND BOTTOM OF THE PLANTING HOLE PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE TREE. REMOVE ANY GLAZING THAT MAY HAVE BEEN CAUSED DURING THE EXCAVATION OF THE HOLE. 3.FOR CONTAINER AND BOX TREES, TO REMOVE ANY POTENTIALLY GIRDLING ROOTS AND OTHER ROOT DEFECTS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SHAVE A 1" LAYER OFF OF THE SIDES AND BOTTOM OF THE ROOTBALL OF ALL TREES JUST BEFORE PLACING INTO THE PLANTING PIT. DO NOT "TEASE" ROOTS OUT FROM THE ROOTBALL. 4.INSTALL THE TREE ON UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE SO THAT THE TOP OF THE ROOTBALL IS TWO TO FOUR INCHES ABOVE THE SURROUNDING GRADE. 5.BACKFILL THE TREE HOLE UTILIZING THE EXISTING TOPSOIL FROM ON-SITE. ROCKS LARGER THAN 1" DIA. AND ALL OTHER DEBRIS SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SOIL PRIOR TO THE BACKFILL. SHOULD ADDITIONAL SOIL BE REQUIRED TO ACCOMPLISH THIS TASK, USE STORED TOPSOIL FROM ON-SITE OR IMPORT ADDITIONAL TOPSOIL FROM OFF-SITE AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. IMPORTED TOPSOIL SHALL BE OF SIMILAR TEXTURAL CLASS AND COMPOSITION IN THE ON-SITE SOIL. 6.THE TOTAL NUMBER OF TREE STAKES (BEYOND THE MINIMUMS LISTED BELOW) WILL BE LEFT TO THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S DISCRETION. SHOULD ANY TREES FALL OR LEAN, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL STRAIGHTEN THE TREE, OR REPLACE IT SHOULD IT BECOME DAMAGED. TREE STAKING SHALL ADHERE TO THE FOLLOWING GUIDELINES: a.1"-2" TREES TWO STAKES PER TREE b.2-1/2"-4" TREES THREE STAKES PER TREE c.TREES OVER 4" CALIPER GUY AS NEEDED d.MULTI-TRUNK TREES THREE STAKES PER TREE MINIMUM, QUANTITY AND POSITIONS AS NEEDED TO STABILIZE THE TREE 7.UPON COMPLETION OF PLANTING, CONSTRUCT AN EARTH WATERING BASIN AROUND THE TREE. COVER THE INTERIOR OF THE TREE RING WITH MULCH (TYPE AND DEPTH PER PLANS). D.SHRUB, PERENNIAL, AND GROUNDCOVER PLANTING 1.DIG THE PLANTING HOLES TWICE AS WIDE AND 2" LESS DEEP THAN EACH PLANT'S ROOTBALL. INSTALL THE PLANT IN THE HOLE. BACKFILL AROUND THE PLANT WITH SOIL AMENDED PER SOIL TEST RECOMMENDATIONS. 2.WHEN PLANTING IS COMPLETE, INSTALL MULCH (TYPE AND DEPTH PER PLANS) OVER ALL PLANTING BEDS, COVERING THE ENTIRE PLANTING AREA. E.SODDING 1.SOD VARIETY TO BE AS SPECIFIED ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. 2.LAY SOD WITHIN 24 HOURS FROM THE TIME OF STRIPPING. DO NOT LAY IF THE GROUND IS FROZEN. 3.LAY THE SOD TO FORM A SOLID MASS WITH TIGHTLY FITTED JOINTS. BUTT ENDS AND SIDES OF SOD STRIPS - DO NOT OVERLAP. STAGGER STRIPS TO OFFSET JOINTS IN ADJACENT COURSES. 4.ROLL THE SOD TO ENSURE GOOD CONTACT OF THE SOD'S ROOT SYSTEM WITH THE SOIL UNDERNEATH. 5.WATER THE SOD THOROUGHLY WITH A FINE SPRAY IMMEDIATELY AFTER PLANTING TO OBTAIN AT LEAST SIX INCHES OF PENETRATION INTO THE SOIL BELOW THE SOD. F.HYDROMULCHING 1.TURF HYDROMULCH MIX (PER 1,000 SF) SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: a.WINTER MIX (OCTOBER 1 - MARCH 31) 50# CELLULOSE FIBER MULCH 2#UNHULLED BERMUDA SEED 2#ANNUAL RYE SEED 15# 15-15-15 WATER SOLUBLE FERTILIZER b.SUMMER MIX (APRIL 1 - SEPTEMBER 30) 50# CELLULOSE FIBER MULCH 2#HULLED BERMUDA SEED 15# 15-15-15 WATER SOLUBLE FERTILIZER 2.SEED HYDROMULCH MIX (PER 1,000 SF) SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: a.GENERAL 50# CELLULOSE FIBER MULCH 15# 15-15-15 WATER SOLUBLE FERTILIZER SEED RATE PER LEGEND G.CLEAN UP 1.DURING LANDSCAPE PREPARATION AND PLANTING, KEEP ALL PAVEMENT CLEAN AND ALL WORK AREAS IN A NEAT, ORDERLY CONDITION. 2.DISPOSED LEGALLY OF ALL EXCAVATED MATERIALS OFF THE PROJECT SITE. H.INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE 1.UPON COMPLETION OF THE WORK, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE SITE CLEAN, FREE OF DEBRIS AND TRASH, AND SUITABLE FOR USE AS INTENDED. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL THEN REQUEST AN INSPECTION BY THE OWNER TO DETERMINE FINAL ACCEPTABILITY. 2.WHEN THE INSPECTED PLANTING WORK DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPLACE AND/OR REPAIR THE REJECTED WORK TO THE OWNER'S SATISFACTION WITHIN 24 HOURS. 3.THE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE PERIOD WILL NOT COMMENCE UNTIL THE LANDSCAPE WORK HAS BEEN RE-INSPECTED BY THE OWNER AND FOUND TO BE ACCEPTABLE. AT THAT TIME, A WRITTEN NOTICE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE WILL BE ISSUED BY THE OWNER, AND THE MAINTENANCE AND GUARANTEE PERIODS WILL COMMENCE. I.LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE 1.THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF ALL WORK SHOWN ON THESE PLANS FOR 90 DAYS BEYOND FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF ALL LANDSCAPE WORK BY THE OWNER. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SHALL INCLUDE WEEKLY SITE VISITS FOR THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS (AS APPROPRIATE): PROPER PRUNING, RESTAKING OF TREES, RESETTING OF PLANTS THAT HAVE SETTLED, MOWING AND AERATION OF LAWNS, WEEDING, RESEEDING AREAS WHICH HAVE NOT GERMINATED WELL, TREATING FOR INSECTS AND DISEASES,REPLACEMENT OF MULCH, REMOVAL OF LITTER, REPAIRS TO THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM DUE TO FAULTY PARTS AND/OR WORKMANSHIP, AND THE APPROPRIATE WATERING OF ALL PLANTINGS. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN PROPER WORKING ORDER, WITH SCHEDULING ADJUSTMENTS BY SEASON TO MAXIMIZE WATER CONSERVATION. 2. SHOULD SEEDED AND/OR SODDED AREAS NOT BE COVERED BY AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR WATERING THESE AREAS AND OBTAINING A FULL, HEALTHY STAND OF GRASS AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. 3.TO ACHIEVE FINAL ACCEPTANCE AT THE END OF THE MAINTENANCE PERIOD, ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MUST OCCUR: a.THE LANDSCAPE SHALL SHOW ACTIVE, HEALTHY GROWTH (WITH EXCEPTIONS MADE FOR SEASONAL DORMANCY). ALL PLANTS NOT MEETING THIS CONDITION SHALL BE REJECTED AND REPLACED BY HEALTHY PLANT MATERIAL PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE. b.ALL HARDSCAPE SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE. c.SODDED AREAS MUST BE ACTIVELY GROWING AND MUST REACH A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 1 1/2 INCHES BEFORE FIRST MOWING. HYDROMULCHED AREAS SHALL SHOW ACTIVE, HEALTHY GROWTH. BARE AREAS LARGER THAN TWELVE SQUARE INCHES MUST BE RESODDED OR RESEEDED (AS APPROPRIATE) PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE. ALL SODDED TURF SHALL BE NEATLY MOWED. J.WARRANTY PERIOD, PLANT GUARANTEE AND REPLACEMENTS 1.THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL GUARANTEE ALL TREES, SHRUBS, PERENNIALS, SOD, SEEDED/HYDROMULCHED AREAS, AND IRRIGATION SYSTEMS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF THE OWNER'S FINAL ACCEPTANCE (90 DAYS FOR ANNUAL PLANTS). THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPLACE, AT HIS OWN EXPENSE AND TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE OWNER, ANY PLANTS WHICH DIE IN THAT TIME, OR REPAIR ANY PORTIONS OF THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM WHICH OPERATE IMPROPERLY. 2.AFTER THE INITIAL MAINTENANCE PERIOD AND DURING THE GUARANTEE PERIOD, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL ONLY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REPLACEMENT OF PLANTS WHEN PLANT DEATH CANNOT BE ATTRIBUTED DIRECTLY TO OVERWATERING OR OTHER DAMAGE BY HUMAN ACTIONS. K.PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF (2) COPIES OF RECORD DRAWINGS TO THE OWNER UPON COMPLETION OF WORK. A RECORD DRAWING IS A RECORD OF ALL CHANGES THAT OCCURRED IN THE FIELD AND THAT ARE DOCUMENTED THROUGH CHANGE ORDERS, ADDENDA, OR CONTRACTOR/CONSULTANT DRAWING MARKUPS. 5 6 7 4 1 8 9 11 10 12 PREVAILING WINDS NOTES: 1. SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING PIT PRIOR TO SETTING TREE. 2. REMOVE EXCESS SOIL APPLIED ON TOP OF THE ROOTBALL THAT COVERS THE ROOT FLARE. THE PLANTING HOLE DEPTH SHALL BE SUCH THAT THE ROOTBALL RESTS ON UNDISTURBED SOIL, AND THE ROOT FLARE IS 2"-4" ABOVE FINISH GRADE. 3. FOR B&B TREES, CUT OFF BOTTOM 1/3 OF WIRE BASKET BEFORE PLACING TREE IN HOLE, CUT OFF AND REMOVE REMAINDER OF BASKET AFTER TREE IS SET IN HOLE, REMOVE ALL NYLON TIES, TWINE, ROPE, AND OTHER PACKING MATERIAL. REMOVE AS MUCH BURLAP FROM AROUND ROOTBALL AS IS PRACTICAL. 4. REMOVE ALL NURSERY STAKES AFTER PLANTING. 5. FOR TREES 36" BOX/2.5" CAL. AND LARGER, USE THREE STAKES OR DEADMEN (AS APPROPRIATE), SPACED EVENLY AROUND TREE. 6. STAKING SHALL BE TIGHT ENOUGH TO PREVENT TRUNK FROM BENDING, BUT LOOSE ENOUGH TO ALLOW SOME TRUNK MOVEMENT IN WIND. 1 2 3 TREE CANOPY. CINCH-TIES (24" BOX/2" CAL. TREES AND SMALLER) OR 12 GAUGE GALVANIZED WIRE WITH NYLON TREE STRAPS AT TREE AND STAKE (36" BOX/2.5" CAL. TREES AND LARGER). SECURE TIES OR STRAPS TO TRUNK JUST ABOVE LOWEST MAJOR BRANCHES. GREEN STEEL T-POSTS. EXTEND POSTS 12" MIN. INTO UNDISTURBED SOIL. 24" X 3/4" P.V.C. MARKERS OVER WIRES. PRESSURE-TREATED WOOD DEADMAN, TWO PER TREE (MIN.). BURY OUTSIDE OF PLANTING PIT AND 18" MIN. INTO UNDISTURBED SOIL. MULCH, TYPE AND DEPTH PER PLANS. DO NOT PLACE MULCH WITHIN 6" OF TRUNK. FINISH GRADE. BACKFILL. AMEND AND FERTILIZE ONLY AS RECOMMENDED IN SOIL FERTILITY ANALYSIS. ROOT BALL. UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL. 4" HIGH EARTHEN WATERING BASIN. TRUNK FLARE. CONIFEROUS TREE PREVAILING WINDS STAKING EXAMPLES (PLAN VIEW) 2 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 4 3X ROOTBALL DIA. 5 2 3 5 12 NON-CONIFEROUS TREE 13 13 FINISH GRADE. No. DATE REVISIONS Drawn by: Checked by: Project No. Date NOTE 972-724-4440 972-691-7731 FAX CONSTRUCTION INTERIORS ARCHITECTURE APDG.US A PLUS DESIGN GROUP C COPYRIGHT A PLUS DESIGN GROUP 2017 ST A TE O F T E XASLP-2(800) 680-6630 15305 Dallas Pkwy., Ste 300 Addison, TX 75001 www.landscape-consultants.net D E S I G N G R O U P Celebrating 10 Years 1/5/2018 ALPINE WASHZONE - PD-294-CLOT 1R1, Block A of theWhite Glove Express Addition250 S Denton Tap Rd, Coppell, TX 75019 PLANTING SPECS & DETAILSExhibit C 2 of 3 Scale 1" = 20' 10'40'20'0' No. DATE REVISIONS Drawn by: Checked by: Project No. Date NOTE 972-724-4440 972-691-7731 FAX CONSTRUCTION INTERIORS ARCHITECTURE APDG.US A PLUS DESIGN GROUP C COPYRIGHT A PLUS DESIGN GROUP 2017 ST A TE O F T E XASTS-1(800) 680-6630 15305 Dallas Pkwy., Ste 300 Addison, TX 75001 www.landscape-consultants.net D E S I G N G R O U P Celebrating 10 Years 1/5/2018 ALPINE WASHZONE - PD-294-CLOT 1R1, Block A of theWhite Glove Express Addition250 S Denton Tap Rd, Coppell, TX 75019 TREE SURVEY EXISTING TREE LEGEND INDICATES TREE NUMBER MITIGATION FOR REMOVAL OF EXISTING TREES MITIGATION FOR REMOVAL OF 52" OF PROTECTED TREES SHALL BE ACHIEVED AS FOLLOWS: 1)CREDIT FOR PRESERVATION OF EXISTING TREES: 66" x 56%= 37" CREDIT 2)NEW TREES: 5 TREES x 3"= 15" CREDIT 52" CREDIT EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED EXISTING TREE TO BE PROTECTED IN PLACE TREE PROTECTION FENCE NOTE: ALL TREE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY FORT WORTH ARBORISTS. (RPZ) ROOT PROTECTION ZONE IF BARE DIRT 8" MULCH OUTSIDE RPZ ESTABLISH FENCE PROTECTION MINIMUM 5' FROM TRUNK 6" MULCH INSIDE RPZ DRIP LINE ROOT PROTECTION ZONE (RPZ) PROPERTY LINE TREE TRUNK STREET5' CURB MINIMUM 5' FROM THE TRUNK RPZ (ROOT PROTECTION ZONE) LEVEL I AND UNDER DRIP LINE AS MINIMAL PROTECTION FOR ROOTS FROM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES NOTES: 1.OPTION USED FOR TIGHT CONSTRUCTION AREAS OR WHEN CONSTRUCTION OCCURS IN ROOT PROTECTION ZONE. 2.FOR ACCEPTABLE FENCING MATERIALS SEE SPECIFICATIONS. A SCALE: NOT TO SCALE TREE PROTECTION FENCE - ELEVATION B SCALE: NOT TO SCALE TREE PROTECTION FENCE TREE PROTECTION SPECIFICATIONS MATERIALS 1.FENCING: 6 FOOT HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCING. 2.POSTS: POSTS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 72 INCHES LONG AND STEEL. CONSTRUCTION METHODS 1.ALL TREES AND SHRUBS SHOWN TO REMAIN WITHIN THE PROXIMITY OF THE CONSTRUCTION SITE SHALL BE PROTECTED PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY. 2.EMPLOY THE SERVICES OF AN ISA (INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF ARBORICULTURE) CERTIFIED ARBORIST AND OBTAIN ALL REQUIRED PERMITS TO PRUNE THE EXISTING TREES FOR CLEANING, RAISING AND THINNING, AS MAY BE REQUIRED. 3.PROTECTIVE FENCING SHALL BE ERECTED OUTSIDE THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE (CRZ, EQUAL TO 1' FROM THE TRUNK FOR EVERY 1" OF DBH) AT LOCATIONS SHOWN IN THE PLANS OR AS DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPE CONSULTANT AND/OR CITY ARBORIST, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DETAILS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. FENCING SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND REPAIRED BY THE CONTRACTOR DURING SITE CONSTRUCTION. TREES IN CLOSE PROXIMITY SHALL BE FENCED TOGETHER, RATHER THAN INDIVIDUALLY. 4.PROTECTIVE FENCE LOCATIONS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO STREET INTERSECTIONS OR DRIVES SHALL ADHERE TO THE APPLICABLE JURISDICTION'S SIGHT DISTANCE CRITERIA. 5.THE PROTECTIVE FENCING SHALL BE ERECTED BEFORE SITE WORK COMMENCES AND SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE DURING THE ENTIRE CONSTRUCTION PHASE. 6.THE INSTALLATION POSTS SHALL BE PLACED EVERY 6 FEET ON CENTER AND EMBEDDED TO 18 INCHES DEEP. CHAIN LINK SHALL BE ATTACHED TO THE INSTALLATION POSTS BY THE USE OF SUFFICIENT WIRE TIES TO SECURELY FASTEN THE CHAIN LINK TO THE POSTS TO HOLD THE CHAIN LINK IN A STABLE AND UPRIGHT POSITION. 7.WITHIN THE CRZ: a.DO NOT CLEAR, FILL OR GRADE IN THE CRZ OF ANY TREE. b.DO NOT STORE, STOCKPILE OR DUMP ANY JOB MATERIAL, SOIL OR RUBBISH UNDER THE SPREAD OF THE TREE BRANCHES. c.DO NOT PARK OR STORE ANY EQUIPMENT OR SUPPLIES UNDER THE TREE CANOPY. d.DO NOT SET UP ANY CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS UNDER THE TREE CANOPY (SUCH AS PIPE CUTTING AND THREADING, MORTAR MIXING, PAINTING OR LUMBER CUTTING). e.DO NOT NAIL OR ATTACH TEMPORARY SIGNS METERS, SWITCHES, WIRES, BRACING OR ANY OTHER ITEM TO THE TREES. f.DO NOT PERMIT RUNOFF FROM WASTE MATERIALS INCLUDING SOLVENTS, CONCRETE WASHOUTS, ASPHALT TACK COATS (MC-30 OIL), ETC. TO ENTER THE CRZ. BARRIERS ARE TO BE PROVIDED TO PREVENT SUCH RUNOFF SUBSTANCES FROM ENTERING THE CRZ WHENEVER POSSIBLE, INCLUDING IN AN AREA WHERE RAIN OR SURFACE WATER COULD CARRY SUCH MATERIALS TO THE ROOT SYSTEM OF THE TREE. 8.ROUTE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES TO AVOID THE CRZ. IF DIGGING IS UNAVOIDABLE, BORE UNDER THE ROOTS, OR HAND DIG TO AVOID SEVERING THEM. 9.WHERE EXCAVATION IN THE VICINITY OF TREES MUST OCCUR, SUCH AS FOR IRRIGATION INSTALLATION, PROCEED WITH CAUTION, AND USING HAND TOOLS ONLY. 10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT CUT ROOTS LARGER THAN ONE INCH IN DIAMETER WHEN EXCAVATION OCCURS NEAR EXISTING TREES. ALL ROOTS LARGER THAN ONE INCH IN DIAMETER ARE TO BE CUT CLEANLY. FOR OAKS ONLY, ALL WOUNDS SHALL BE PAINTED WITH WOUND SEALER WITHIN 30 MINUTES 11. REMOVE ALL TREES, SHRUBS OR BUSHES TO BE CLEARED FROM PROTECTED ROOT ZONE AREAS BY HAND. 12. TREES DAMAGED OR KILLED DUE TO CONTRACTOR'S NEGLIGENCE DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE MITIGATED AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE AND TO THE PROJECT OWNER'S AND LOCAL JURISDICTION'S SATISFACTION. 13. ANY TREE REMOVAL SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE OWNER AND LOCAL JURISDICTION PRIOR TO ITS REMOVAL, AND THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE ALL REQUIRED PERMITS FOR SUCH ACTIVITIES. 14. COVER EXPOSED ROOTS AT THE END OF EACH DAY WITH SOIL, MULCH OR WET BURLAP. 15. IN CRITICAL ROOT ZONE AREAS THAT CANNOT BE PROTECTED DUING CONSTRUCTION AND WHERE HEAVY TRAFFIC IS ANTICIPATED, COVER THE SOIL WITH EIGHT INCHES OF ORGANIC MULCH TO MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION. THIS EIGHT INCH DEPTH OF MULCH SHALL BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. 16. WATER ALL TREES IMPACTED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, DEEPLY ONCE A WEEK DURING PERIODS OF HOT DRY WEATHER. SPRAY TREE CROWNS WITH WATER PERIODICALLY TO REDUCE DUST ACCUMULATION ON THE LEAVES. 17. WHEN INSTALLING CONCRETE ADJACENT TO THE ROOT ZONE OF A TREE, USE A PLASTIC VAPOR BARRIER BEHIND THE CONCRETE TO PROHIBIT LEACHING OF LIME INTO THE SOIL. 18. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF ALL TREE PROTECTION FENCING WHEN ALL THREATS TO THE EXISTING TREES FROM CONSTRUCTION-RELATED ACTIVITIES HAVE BEEN REMOVED. EXISTING UNDERSIZED TREE - PROTECT IN PLACE (TYP.) EXISTING UNDERSIZED TREE (NOT INCLUDED IN SURVEY) - PROTECT IN PLACE Exhibit C 3 of 3 January 5, 2018 ©COPYRIGHT A PLUS DESIGN GROUP 2017 A PLUS DESIGN GROUP ARCHITECTURE INTERIORS CONSTRUCTION 972-724-4440 APDG.US Trent W. Clark Architect TX Registration # 17084 PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION These Drawings are incomplete and may not be used for regulatory approval, permit, or construction NORTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION ALPINE WASHZONE - PD-294-CLot 1R1, Block a of theWhite Glove Express Addition250 S Denton Tap Rd, Coppell, TX 75019EXISTINGSOUTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION 7'-4"6'-0"DUMPSTER ELEVATION FRONTSIDE STONE-1 BRICK-2 CAST STONE PAINT A1 FENCE ELEVATION REAR VACUUM CANOPY ELEVATION FRONTSIDE NEW FENCE CONSTRUCTION AND DESIGN TO MATCH EXISTING FENCE BRICK-2 STONE-1 CMU-2 METAL-1 10'-0" MATCHEXISTING19'-8"EXISTING25'-8"31'-4"EXISTINGEXISTING19'-8"25'-8"31'-4"19'-8"24'-8"EXISTINGEXISTINGBRICK-1 BRICK-1 BRICK-1 BRICK-1 BRICK-1 CMU-1 STONE-1 CMU-2 STONE-1 STONE-1 METAL-2 METAL-1 METAL-1 METAL-1 STONE-1 STONE-1 STONE-1 STONE-1 EXISTING METAL ROOF, PAINT EXISTING METAL ROOF, PAINT EXISTING METAL ROOF, PAINT METAL-1 METAL-1 METAL-1 METAL-1 METAL-1METAL-1 CMU-1 CMU-1 CMU-2 METAL-2 METAL-2METAL-1 CMU-1CMU-1 CMU-1CMU-1CMU-1 CMU-2 CMU-2 CMU-2 NEW OVERHEAD ALUMINUM DOOR STEEL CANOPY PAINT-1 FRONT VACUUM CANOPY ELEVATION FRONT 7'-4"SIDE STONE-1 CMU-2 METAL-1 10'-0"CASHIER CANOPY ELEVATION FRONT 7'-4"SIDE STONE-1 CMU-2 METAL-1 10'-0"MONUMENT SIGN 4'-0"STONE-1 BRICK-2 CAST STONE Exhibit D1of 2 Brick-1, Existing CMU-1, Existing Stone-1, New Eldorado Stone Vantage 30, White Elm Main Building, Cashier & Vacuum Canopies CMU-2, New Featherlite Split Face Shadow Grey Main Building, Cashier & Vacuum Canopies Metal-1, New Roof Pac Clad Cityscape (Existing roof painted P-1 to match Metal-1) Main Building, Cashier & Vacuum Canopies ALPINE WASH Overhead Aluminum Door Clear Anodized Aluminum Paint-1 SW 7655 Exhibit D2 of 2 LM 250 S. DENTON TAP RD. COPPELL, TX DRAWING NUMBER T7914 INITIAL DATE 1-8-18 REV 1 1-9-18 REV 2 REV 3 REV 4 REV 5 REV 6 REV 7 REV 8 Copyright 2017 TSS SIGN AREA: 40 SF SCALE: 3/4” = 1’ SCOPE OF WORK: FABRICATE & INSTALL (1) DOUBLE SIDED MONUMENT SIGN WITH PUSH THRU LETTERS/LOGO SPECIFICATIONS: 1 PRIMED ALUMINUM FRAME 2 .125 ROUTED ALUMINUM FACES (SANDSTONE) 3 .5” WHITE ACRYLIC PUSH THRU GRAPHICS 4 LED INTERNAL ILLUMINATION 5 PREMIUM VINYL GRAPHICS 6 MASONRY - CMU CONCRETE BLOCK WITH CULTURED STONE WRAP (BROWN LIMESTONE) PAGE 1 0F 3 DAVID PEARSON 10’-0.00”2’-0.00”3’-0.00”4’-0.00”2” Primed Aluminum Frame .050 Aluminum Wrap .125” Routed Aluminum Faces .5” Acrylic Faces Routed .375” Deep LED’s Power Supply(s) 10” Post Thru Bottom To Top Of Sign Electric In 6’ 0” 2’ 0”Exhibit E1 of 3 LM 250 S. DENTON TAP RD. COPPELL, TX DRAWING NUMBER T7914 INITIAL DATE 1-8-18 REV 1 1-9-18 REV 2 REV 3 REV 4 REV 5 REV 6 REV 7 REV 8 Copyright 2017 TSS PAGE 2 0F 3 DAVID PEARSON SIGN AREA: 93.75 SF (LOGO IS 18.75 SF) SCALE: 3/16” = 1’ SCOPE OF WORK: FABRICATE & INSTALL (1) SET OF LED CHANNEL LETTERS (SEE PAGE 3 FOR DETAILS) SPECIFICATIONS: 1 .063 ALUMINUM LETTER/LOGO BACKS (WHITE INTERIORS) 2 .040 ALUMINUM RETURNS (PMS 2367C) 3 3/16” ACRYLIC FACES (WHITE) 4 1” TRIMCAP (PMS 2367C) 5 PREMIUM VINYL GRAPHICS (PMS 2367C) 6 LED INTERNAL ILLUMINATION 7 DIRECT MOUNT 24'-6.00" 51’-0.00”Exhibit E2 of 3 LM 250 S. DENTON TAP RD. COPPELL, TX DRAWING NUMBER T7914 INITIAL DATE 1-8-18 REV 1 1-9-18 REV 2 REV 3 REV 4 REV 5 REV 6 REV 7 REV 8 Copyright 2017 TSS PAGE 3 0F 3 DAVID PEARSON SCALE: 1/2” = 1’ SCOPE OF WORK: FABRICATE & INSTALL (1) SET OF LED CHANNEL LETTERS (DETAILS) SPECIFICATIONS: 1 .063 ALUMINUM LETTER/LOGO BACKS (WHITE INTERIORS) 2 .040 ALUMINUM RETURNS (PMS 2367C) 3 3/16” ACRYLIC FACES (WHITE) 4 1” TRIMCAP (PMS 2367C) 5 PREMIUM VINYL GRAPHICS (PMS 2367C) 6 LED INTERNAL ILLUMINATION 7 DIRECT MOUNT DIRECT MOUNT CHANNEL LETTERS Disconnect switch 1” trimcap .040 aluminum returns 3/16” acrylic faces LED’s Power supply(s) Vented power supply housing Non corrosive flair anchors Weep hole1’-10.42”1’-10.39”3’-8.87”5’-0.00”9’-0.00”10’-4.98” SIGN AREA: 93.75 SF (LOGO IS 18.75 SF)Exhibit E3 of 3 Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3746 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3746 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 3Version: Reference: In Control: Planning & Zoning Commission 01/08/2018File Created: Final Action: PD-217R2-C, Doggie’s WonderlandFile Name: Title: Consider approval of an Ordinance for Case No. PD-217R2-C, Doggie’s Wonderland, a zoning change from C (Commercial) and PD-217R-C (Planned Development District-217 Revised-Commercial) to PD-214R2-C (Planned Development District Revision-2-Commercial) to amend and expand the Detail Site Plan for the existing 0.692 acre Doggie’s Wonderland site and to allow the construction of an approximate 3,000 square foot building for a kennel (rescue), self-service pet wash and bakery use on 0.439 acres and to establish a Concept Plan for future development on the remaining 0.346 acres, for a total of 1.479 acres of land located on the east side of Denton Tap Road between E. Bethel School Road and Vanbebber Drive, (120 E. Bethel School Road and 400 S. Denton Tap Road); and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: D. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Cover Memo.pdf, Ordinance.pdf, Exhibit A - Legal Description.pdf, Exhibit B - Site Plan.pdf, Exhibit C - Landscape Plan and Tree Survey.pdf, Exhibit D- Elevations and Rendering.pdf, Exhibit E - Floor Plan.pdf Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 3 Mindi Hurley 1 3/21/20183/20/2018 Approve 3 Christel Pettinos - FYI 2 3/20/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3746) Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 PassApproved01/18/2018Planning & Zoning Commission Ms. Paron-Boswell introduced the case with exhibits. Ms. Paron-Boswell stated that staff is recommending approval subject to the following conditions: 1. A grease trap shall be required for the bakery. 2. Hours of operation for the pet wash not exceed those for Doggie Wonderland. 3. A shared parking agreement be in place for Lots 4R and 5. 4. A shared dumpster agreement be in place for Lots 4R, 5 and 6. Chairman Haas asked Ms. Paron-Boswell what the size of the grease trap will be that is installed. Ms. Paron-Boswell stated that it is based on the Plumbing Code. Josh Barton, P.E., G&A Consultants, LLC, 111 Hillside Drive, Lewisville, Texas, 75057, was present to address questions and concerns from the commission. Mr. Barton agreed with the conditions presented by staff. Chairman Haas opened the Public Hearing and advised that no one signed up to speak and no one wished to speak. Chairman Haas closed the Public Hearing. A motion was made by Vice Chair Portman, seconded by Commissioner Williford, to recommend approval of this agenda item with the conditions outlined by staff. The motion passed by unanimous vote. (7-0) Action Text: Chair Edmund Haas, Vice Chair Glenn Portman, Commissioner Sue Blankenship, Commissioner Doug Robinson, Commissioner George Williford, Commissioner Freddie Guerra, and Commissioner Ed Maurer 7Aye: 2 PassClose the Public Hearing and Approve 02/13/2018City Council Presentation: Mary Paron-Boswell, Planner, made a presentation to the City Council. Mayor Hunt opened the Public Hearing and advised that no one signed up to speak. Willian Tsao, applicant, was available for questions of the City Council. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling, seconded by Councilmember Cliff Long, to close the Public Hearing and approve this Agenda Item subject to the following conditions: 1) A grease trap shall be required for the bakery; 2) Hours of operation for the pet wash not exceed those for Doggie Wonderland; 3) A shared parking agreement be in place for Lots 4R and 5; and 4) A shared dumpster agreement be in place for Lots 4R, 5 and 6. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Action Text: Councilmember Cliff Long, Brianna Hinojosa-Flores, Councilmember Wes Mays, Councilmember Gary Roden, Councilmember Marvin Franklin, Councilmember Mark Hill, and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 7Aye: 3 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3746 Title Consider approval of an Ordinance for Case No. PD-217R2-C, Doggie’s Wonderland, a Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3746) zoning change from C (Commercial) and PD-217R-C (Planned Development District-217 Revised-Commercial) to PD-214R2-C (Planned Development District Revision-2-Commercial) to amend and expand the Detail Site Plan for the existing 0.692 acre Doggie’s Wonderland site and to allow the construction of an approximate 3,000 square foot building for a kennel (rescue), self-service pet wash and bakery use on 0.439 acres and to establish a Concept Plan for future development on the remaining 0.346 acres, for a total of 1.479 acres of land located on the east side of Denton Tap Road between E. Bethel School Road and Vanbebber Drive, (120 E. Bethel School Road and 400 S. Denton Tap Road); and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Summary Staff Recommendation: On February 13, 2018 the City Council unanimously approved this request, subject to the P&Z conditions which have been incorporated into the ordinance. On January 18, 2018, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (7-0) of PD-217R2- C Doggie’s Wonderland, with the following conditions: 1. A grease trap shall be required for the bakery 2. Hours of operation for the pet wash not exceed those for Doggie Wonderland. 3. A shared parking agreement be in place for Lots 4R and 5. 4. A shared dumpster agreement be in place for Lots 4R, 5 and 6. The Planning Department recommends approval. Goal Icon: Business Prosperity Page 3City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Mindi Hurley, Director of Community Development Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Consider approval of an Ordinance for PD-217R2-C, Doggie’s Wonderland, to amend and expand the Detail Site Plan for the existing 0.692-acre Doggie’s Wonderland site and to allow the construction of an approximate 3,000 square foot building for a kennel (rescue), self-service pet wash and bakery use on 0.439- acres and to establish a Concept Plan for future development on the remaining 0.346 acres and authorizing the Mayor to Sign 2030: Business Prosperity Executive Summary: The request is to allow the construction of a new building with approximately 3,000 square feet that will house a dog kennel (rescue), self-service pet wash and bakery. Introduction: The proposed 3,012 square foot, one story building is a companion piece to the existing Doggie Wonderland facility which is under the same ownership. The building is proposed to have dog boarding for three different rescue groups; a four-stall self-service pet wash; and a bakery. The three uses will have separate entrances and the pet wash and kennel areas will have the same hours of operation as Doggie’s Wonderland. Due to the irregular lot configuration, some of the landscaping has been adjusted on the site to accommodate parking and access. Overall, the amount of landscaping on site exceeds what is required. Analysis: On February 13, 2018 the City Council unanimously approved this request, subject to the P&Z conditions which have been incorporated into the ordinance. On January 18, 2018, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval (7-0) of PD-217R2- C Doggie’s Wonderland, with the following conditions: 1. A grease trap shall be required for the bakery 2. Hours of operation for the pet wash not exceed those for Doggie Wonderland. 3. A shared parking agreement be in place for Lots 4R and 5. 4. A shared dumpster agreement be in place for Lots 4R, 5 and 6. 2 Legal Review: The City Attorney reviewed this ordinance. Fiscal Impact: None Recommendation: The Planning Department recommends approval. Attachments: 1. Ordinance 2. Exhibit “A” - Legal Description 3. Exhibit “B” - Site Plan 4. Exhibit “C” - Landscape Plan and Tree Survey 5. Exhibit “D” - Elevations/Rendering/Signage 6. Exhibit “E” - Floor Plan 1 TM 96829 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY GRANTING A CHANGE IN ZONING C (COMMERCIAL) AND PD-217R-C (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-217 REVISED COMMERCIAL) TO PD-217R2-C, (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-217 REVISION 2-COMMERCIAL), TO AMEND AND EXPAND THE DETAIL SITE PLAN FOR THE EXISTING 0.692 ACRE DOGGIE’S WONDERLAND SITE AND TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN APPROXIMATE 3,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING FOR A KENNEL (RESCUE), SELF-SERVICE PET WASH AND BAKERY USE ON 0.439 ACRES AND TO ESTABLISH A CONCEPT PLAN FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ON THE REMAINING 0.346 ACRES AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT “A” ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE SITE PLAN, LANDSCAPE PLAN & TREE SURVEY, AND THE ELEVATIONS & RENDERING WITH SIGNAGE AND FLOOR PLAN FOR LOT 5, ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBITS “B”, “C”, “D” AND “E” RESPECTIVELY; PROVIDING DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; PROVIDING A REPEALING CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission and the governing body of the City of Coppell, Texas, in compliance with the laws of the State of Texas and pursuant to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, have given requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and after holding due hearings and affording a full and fair hearing to all property owners generally, and to all persons interested and situated in the affected area and in the vicinity thereof, the said governing body is of the opinion that Zoning Application No. PD-217R2-C should be approved, and in the exercise of legislative discretion have concluded that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map should be amended. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map of the City of Coppell, Texas, duly passed by the governing body of the City of Coppell, Texas, as heretofore amended, be and the same is hereby amended to grant a change in zoning from C (Commercial) and PD-217R-C (Planned Development-217 Revised-Commercial) to PD-217R2-C, (Planned Development-217 2 TM 96829 Revision 2-Commercial), to amend and expand the Detail Site Plan for the existing 0.692 acre in the Northlake Woodlands Addition, Lots 4R-6 of Block A and to allow the construction of an approximate 3,000 square foot building for a kennel (rescue), self-service pet wash and bakery use on 0.439 acres and to establish a Concept Plan for future development on the remaining 0.346 acres; and, being more particularly described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes, subject to the development regulations. SECTION 2. That PD-217R2-C is hereby approved subject to the following development regulations: A. Except as amended herein and as provided in this Ordinance, the property shall be developed in accordance with Commercial zoned property as set forth in Ordinance 91500-A-518 which is incorporated herein as set forth in full and hereby republished. B. The installation of a grease trap shall be required for the bakery use on lot 4R of Block A. C. The hours of operation for the self-service shall not exceed the hours of operation of the pet day care. D. There shall be shared parking for Lots 4R and 5. E. The dumpster shall serve and be shared by the occupants of Lots 4R, 5 and 6 of Block A. SECTION 3. That the Site Plan, Landscape Plan & Tree Survey, Elevations and Building Prescriptive and Rendering, including signage and Floor Plan and all comments and notes to each such exhibits for Lot 5, attached hereto as Exhibits “B”, “C”, “D” and “E” are made a part hereof for all purposes, and hereby approved as development regulations. SECTION 4. That the above property shall be used only in the manner and for the purpose provided for by the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, as heretofore amended, and as amended herein. 3 TM 96829 SECTION 5. That the development of the property herein shall be in accordance with building regulations, zoning ordinances, and any applicable ordinances except as may be specifically altered or amended herein. SECTION 6. That all provisions of the Ordinances of the City of Coppell, Texas, in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same are hereby, repealed, and all other provisions not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 7. That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, and shall not affect the validity of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as a whole. SECTION 8. An offense committed before the effective date of this ordinance is governed by prior law and the provisions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, as amended, in effect when the offense was committed and the former law is continued in effect for this purpose. SECTION 9. That any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions or terms of this ordinance shall be subject to the same penalty as provided for in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, as heretofore amended, and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine not to exceed the sum of Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense; and each and every day such violation shall continue shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense. SECTION 10. That this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage and the publication of its caption, as the law and charter in such cases provide. DULY PASSED by the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas, this the _______ day of ___________________, 2018. APPROVED: 4 TM 96829 _____________________________________ KAREN SELBO HUNT, MAYOR ATTEST: _____________________________________ CHRISTEL PETTINOS, CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________ CITY ATTORNEY EXHIIBIT “A” Legal Description BEGINNING at a 5/8” rebar found at the southeast corner of said 2.237 acre tract, and said Lot 4, and being the southwest corner of Lot 1R, Block 1, First United Methodist Church, Section Two, an addition to the City of Coppell, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Instrument Number 201400047973, Official Public Records, Dallas County, Texas, being on the north line of E. Bethel Road (Called 60' ROW), from which a “+” found in concrete on the south line of aforementioned Lot 1R, bears N 89°55'56” E, 544.86 feet; THENCE S 89°55'56” W, 189.71 feet with the north line of said E. Bethel School Road, and the south line of said 2.237 acre tract, and said Lot 4, to a 1/2” capped rebar set (G&A Consultants) at the southwest corner thereof, and being the southeast corner of Lot 2, Block A, Northlake Woodlands Center, an addition to the City of Coppell, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Instrument Number 201400065647, Official Public Records, Dallas County, Texas; THENCE N 00°34'13” W, 129.50 feet (called 128.95') with the east line of said Lot 2, and the west line of said Lot 4, to a 1/2” capped rebar found (RPLS 3664) at the northwest corner thereof, from which a “+” found in concrete bears N 87°22'56” E, 54.65 feet (called 55.01'); THENCE N 59°49'07” W, 46.00 feet with the northeast line of said Lot 2, to a 1/2” capped rebar set (G&A Consultants) at the northerly northeast corner thereof; THENCE S 87°00'42” W, 14.80 feet with the north line of said Lot 4, to a 1/2” capped rebar set (G&A Consultants) at the southeast corner of Lot 1, Block A, Northlake Woodlands Center, an addition to the City of Coppell, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 81234, Page 1447, Deed Records, Dallas County, Texas, and being an interior corner of said 2.237 acre tract; THENCE N 0°04'16” W, 131.34 feet with the east line of said Lot 1, to a 1/2” capped rebar set (G&A Consultants) at the northeast corner thereof, and being the southwest corner of a Right‐of‐Way Dedication, recorded in Volume 85162, Page 3703, Deed Records, Dallas County, Texas, and being the Northerly Northwest corner of said 2.237 acre tract; THENCE N 84°53'44” E, 250.66 feet with the north line of said 2.237 acre tract, and the south line of said Right‐of‐Way Dedication, to a 1/2” capped rebar found (RPLS 3664) at the southeast corner thereof, being the northeast corner of said 2.237 acre tract, and being the northwest corner of said Lot 1R; THENCE S 00°35'16” E, with the east line of said 2.237 acre tract, and the west line of said Lot 1R, passing at 140.83 feet the northeast corner of said Lot 4, continuing with the east line thereof, a total distance of 304.71 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing approximately 1.479 acres of land. PROJECTSITEVAN BEBBER DR.E. BETHEL SCHOOL RD.S. DENTON TAP RD. S. HEARTZ RD.17132C4DOGGIES WONDERLAND SITE PLAN TBPE Firm No. 1798 TBPLS Firm No. 10047700 111 Hillside Drive • Lewisville, TX 75057 P: 972.436.9712 • F: 972.436.9715 144 Old Town Blvd. North, Ste 2 • Argyle, TX 76226 P: 940.240.1012 • F: 940.240.1028 L E G E N DExhibit B 15' LANDSCAPE BUFFER15' LANDSCAPE BUFFER10' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 5' LANDSCAPE BUFFER5' LANDSCAPE BUFFER15' LANDSCAPE BUFFER15' LANDSCAPE BUFFER10' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 10' LANDSCAPE BUFFER10' LANDSCAPE BUFFER10' LANDSCAPE BUFFERLOT 4R, BLOCK APERIMETER LANDSCAPINGBuffer Required Buffer ProvidedTrees RequiredTrees ProvidedINTERIOR LANDSCAPINGSq. Ft. Required Sq. Ft. ProvidedTrees RequiredTrees ProvidedNON-VEHICULAR LANDSCAPINGSq. Ft. Required Sq. Ft. ProvidedTrees RequiredTrees ProvidedTOTAL SITE AREA DEVOTED TO LANDSCAPING:PERIMETER LANDSCAPINGSq. Ft. Required Sq. Ft. ProvidedTrees Required Trees ProvidedINTERIOR LANDSCAPINGSq. Ft. RequiredSq. Ft. ProvidedTrees RequiredTrees ProvidedNON-VEHICULAR LANDSCAPINGSq. Ft. RequiredSq. Ft. ProvidedTrees RequiredTrees ProvidedTOTAL SITE AREA DEVOTED TO LANDSCAPING:LOT 5, BLOCK APERIMETER LANDSCAPINGSq. Ft. Required Sq. Ft. ProvidedTrees Required Trees ProvidedINTERIOR LANDSCAPINGSq. Ft. Required Sq. Ft. ProvidedTrees Required Trees ProvidedNON-VEHICULAR LANDSCAPINGSq. Ft. Required Sq. Ft. ProvidedTrees Required Trees ProvidedTOTAL SITE AREA DEVOTED TO LANDSCAPING:LOT 6, BLOCK ACity of CoppellLANDSCAPE DATA TABLEE. Bethel School Rd.:15'15' BufferEast Property Line:10'10' Buffer10' BufferWest Property Line:10'North Property Line:10'10' Buffer5' Buffer within parking lotE. Bethel School Rd.4 Existing TreesEast Property Line:10'4 Trees3 Existing TreesWest Property Line:10'North Property Line:10'190/50= 4192/50= 4104/50= 3114/50= 33 TreesVanbebber :15' 15' BufferEast Property Line:10' 10' BufferM.A.EWest Property Line: M.A.E.South Property Line:10'10' Buffer5' Buffer within parking lotVanbebber3 TreesEast Property Line:3 TreesM.A.E.West Property Line:South Property Line:145/50= 3117/50= 3M.A.E114/50= 33 Provided in interiorVanbebber3 TreesEast Property Line:West Property Line:South Property Line:104/50= 3M.A.E.M.A.EVanbebber :15' 15' BufferEast Property Line:M.A.E.M.A.EExisting ConditionsWest Property Line:South Property Line:Existing ConditionsN/A10% of 6,421 = 642 sf901 sf10% of 5,325 = 532 sf1306 sf642/400 sf= 2 Trees1 Existing + 1 New Trees532/400 sf = 2 Trees4 New Trees= 2 Trees Total15% of 25,294 sf=3,794 sf12,796 sf7,080 sf at front (50%)3,794/4,000=1 Tree 1 Tree15% of 16,772 sf=2,515 sf5,035 sf3,948 sf at front (50%)2,515/4,000=1 Tree 1 TreeNo changes to existing No changes to existingNo changes to existing No changes to existingNo changes to existing No changes to existingNo changes to existing No changes to existing14,100/30,234= 46 = 46% of Site 8,661/19,772= 43 = 43% of SiteExisting ConditionsExisting ConditionsN/ANot being developed at this time.TREE #CALIPER (")COMMON NAMEBOTANICAL NAMEPROTECTED REMOVED1006Chinese PistachePistachia chinensisYes No101 7Chinese PistachePistachia chinensisYes No102 7Chinese PistachePistachia chinensisYes No103 8Chinese PistachePistachia chinensisYes No104 6Red OakQuercus shumardiiYes No105 7Red OakQuercus shumardiiYes No106 6Red OakQuercus shumardiiYes No107 6Red OakQuercus shumardiiYes No LANDSCAPE PLAN & TREESURVEYDOGGIES WONDERLAND.TONSRSAETS TA1OF79ETXEAWA R T 17132L1.0TBPE Firm No. 1798TBPLS Firm No. 10047700111 Hillside Drive • Lewisville, TX 75057P: 972.436.9712 • F: 972.436.9715144 Old Town Blvd. North, Ste 2 • Argyle, TX 76226P: 940.240.1012 • F: 940.240.1028LEGENDPLANT LIST*NOTES: ALL LANDSCAPED AREAS SHALL BE FULLY IRRIGATED AND AN IRRIGATION PLAN WILL BE REQUIRED WITH THE BUILDING PERMIT.ANY PROPOSED LIGHTING WILL COMPLY WITH LIGHTING REGULATIONS.TREE CHARTPD17-09-000180PROJECTSITEVAN BEBBER DR.S. HEARTZ RD.E. BETHEL SCHOOL RD.S. DENTON TAP RD.*NOTE: NO TREES TO BE REMOVED.* LOT 6 - DETAILED SITE PLAN REQUIRED ATTIME OF REDEVELOPMENT.Exhibit C TWANG DESIGN LLCwww.twang-design.com817-602-4895 17132A200Date: 12/14/17Scale:DOGGIES WONDERLAND BUILDING ELEVATIONSin theEDWARD A. CROW SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 301CITY OF COPPELLDENTON COUNTY, TEXASLot 4R-6, Block ANORTHLAKE WOODLANDS CENTER ADDITION1.479 AcresDOGGIES WONDERLANDPD17-09-000180MAIN FLOOR0"17'-9"MAIN FLOOR0"18'-6"10"SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1NORTH ELEVATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2WEST ELEVATIONSTANDING SEAM METALSTACKED LIMESTONEBRICK VENEERBRICK VENEERCEMENT PLASTERSTACKED LIMESTONESTACKED LIMESTONEBRICK VENEERBRICK VENEERSTACKED LIMESTONECEMENT PLASTERBRICK VENEERNORTH ELEVATION 927 SF 100%- STONE 342 SF 37%- BRICK 514 SF 55%- CEMENT PLASTER 71 SF 18%WEST ELEVATION 614 SF 100%- STONE 224 SF 36%- BRICK 324 SF 53%- CEMENT PLASTER 66 SF 11%Exhibit D1 of 3 TWANG DESIGN LLCwww.twang-design.com817-602-4895 17132A201Date: 12/14/17Scale:DOGGIES WONDERLAND BUILDING ELEVATIONSin theEDWARD A. CROW SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 301CITY OF COPPELLDENTON COUNTY, TEXASLot 4R-6, Block ANORTHLAKE WOODLANDS CENTER ADDITION1.479 AcresDOGGIES WONDERLANDPD17-09-000180MAIN FLOOR0"16'-8"MAIN FLOOR0"16'-8"SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2EAST ELEVATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1SOUTH ELEVATIONSTANDING SEAM METALCEMENT PLASTERBRICK VENEERSTACKED LIMESTONESTANDING SEAM METALCEMENT PLASTERBRICK VENEERSTACKED LIMESTONEBRICK VENEERSOUTH ELEVATION 954 SF 100%- STONE 70 SF 7%- BRICK 793 SF 83%- CEMENT PLASTER 91 SF 10%EAST ELEVATION 484 SF 100%- STONE 44 SF 10%- BRICK 378 SF 78%- CEMENT PLASTER 62 SF 12%Exhibit D2 of 3 TWANG DESIGN LLCwww.twang-design.com817-602-4895 17132A300Date: 12/14/17Scale:DOGGIES WONDERLAND BUILDING RENDERINGin theEDWARD A. CROW SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 301CITY OF COPPELLDENTON COUNTY, TEXASLot 4R-6, Block ANORTHLAKE WOODLANDS CENTER ADDITION1.479 AcresDOGGIES WONDERLANDPD17-09-000180BRICK VENEERBORAL SLATELIMESTONE,STACKEDTHE COLORILLUSTRATION IS FORTHE PRESENTATIONONLY. THE FINALCONSTRUCTION MAYBE DIFFERENT.CEMENT PLASTER,SENERGY CUSTARDSTANDING SEAM METAL,PAC SLATE GRAYExhibit D3 of 3 TWANG DESIGN LLCwww.twang-design.com817-602-4895 17132A100Date: 12/14/17Scale:DOGGIES WONDERLAND FLOOR PLANin theEDWARD A. CROW SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 301CITY OF COPPELLDENTON COUNTY, TEXASLot 4R-6, Block ANORTHLAKE WOODLANDS CENTER ADDITION1.479 AcresDOGGIES WONDERLANDPD17-09-000180FD01D01D01GROSS LEASING AREA5'-0"5'-0"15'-0"3'-0"5'-0"50'-59/16"25'-69/16"38'-23/8"60'-01/8"14'-0"27'-415/16"16'-1015/16"5'-11/2"DOWN SPOUTTABLEFRIGDISPLAYOVENBUSINESS OCC=19A2 OCC=21M OCC=14SEL PET WASH642.23 sq ftANIMAL RESCUE1,964.14 sq ftFIRE SPRINKLER109LG DOG KENNEL267.73 sq ftSTORAGE300SF/ PERSONOCC=1KENNEL146.63 sq ftSTORAGE300SF/ PERSONOCC=1KENNEL146.93 sq ftSTORAGE300SF/ PERSONOCC=1OFFICE157.27 sq ftBUSINESS150SF/ PERSONOCC=2OFFICE96.62 sq ftBUSINESS150SF/ PERSONOCC=1OFFICE96.67 sq ftBUSINESS150SF/ PERSONOCC=1RECEPTION78.66 sq ftWAITING AREA15SF/ PERSONOCC=6HALLWAY155.87 sq ftBUSINESS150SF/ PERSONOCC=2RESTROOMLG DOG KENNEL270.61 sq ftSTORAGE300SF/ PERSONOCC=1STORAGE42.52 sq ftSTORAGE300SF/ PERSONOCC=1RESTROOMOFFICE195.20 sq ftBUSINESS150SF/ PERSONOCC=2BATH363.46 sq ftMERCANTILE60SF/ PERSONOCC=7STORAGE33.51 sq ftSTORAGE300SF/ PERSONOCC=1WAITING48.91 sq ftWAITING AREA15SF/ PERSONOCC=6SALES92.65 sq ftSTANDING5SF/ PERSONOCC=19RESTROOMFOOD PREP121.14 sq ftKITCHEN200SF/ PERSONOCC=1SERVICE123.96 sq ftBUSINESS150SF/ PERSONOCC=1BAKERY452.73 sq ft1 STORY BUILDING3,011.57 sq ftSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1MAIN FLOOR PLANExhibit "E" Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3836 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3836 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 2Version: Reference: In Control: Police 03/08/2018File Created: Final Action: Police Dispatch RemodelFile Name: Title: Consider award of bid and authorize a NCPA contract with Core Construction in the amount of $200,584.34, as budgeted from the Crime Control District, for the remodel of the communication area in the Criminal Justice facility located at 130 Town Center Blvd.; and authorizing the City Manager to sign and execute any necessary documents. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: E. Sponsors: Enactment Date: PD Dispatch Remodel - Memo.pdf, PD Dispatch Remodel - CORE Estimate.pdf Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 2 Mac Tristan 1 3/9/20183/8/2018 Approve 2 Jennifer Miller 2 3/9/20183/8/2018 Approve 2 Christel Pettinos - FYI 3 3/8/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 2 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3836 Title Consider award of bid and authorize a NCPA contract with Core Construction in the amount of $200,584.34, as budgeted from the Crime Control District, for the remodel of the Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3836) communication area in the Criminal Justice facility located at 130 Town Center Blvd.; and authorizing the City Manager to sign and execute any necessary documents. Summary See Attached Memo Fiscal Impact: Funds have been budgeted in the Crime Control and Prevention District for this project. (36-10-00-5110) Staff Recommendation: Staff Recommends Approval Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Mac Tristan, Chief of Police Date: March 6, 2018 Reference: Consider award of bid and authorize a NCPA contract with Core Construction in the amount of $200,584.34, as budgeted, for the remodel of the communication area in the Criminal Justice facility located at 130 Town Center Blvd.; and authorizing the City Manager to sign and execute any necessary documents. 2030: Coppell 2030, Healthy Neighborhoods/Safe Neighborhoods Introduction: The Coppell Police and Fire Communications was combined with North Texas Emergency Communications Center (NTECC) in March of 2016. The “communications area” has remained vacant since the joining of NTECC. The Police Department has envisioned this area to be converted into an Operations Center, as well as a conference room area, that will be utilized for police specific events and other meetings as needed. The area will still maintain an IT server room for needs of the department and city. Analysis: The planning and vision for the remodel is intended to match the look and feel of current city facility. This remodel is intended to create a work environment that will enhance the operations of the police department for now and in the future. Legal Review: Agenda item does not require legal review. 2 Fiscal Impact: Total cost of this project is $200,584.34 and this amount has been budgeted for out of Crime Control Funds. Recommendation: The Police Department has created a plan and designed a facility that reflects our vision, mission, philosophies and direction for the Police Department. The City of Coppell is constantly working on re-imagining government and the police department has a responsibility to take that re-imaging into the communications area. As such, staff recommends City Council to approve the contract with Core Construction at a cost not to exceed $200,584.34 and authorize the City Manager to sign. Final EstimateMatt LetlowCORE TX04-03 - NCPA Contract: Job Order Contracting (National) - 2015-2018 - 9/01/2015 to 9/30/2018Coppell Police Dispatch Remodel - TX COC 0028Estimator: Matt LetlowCoppell Police Dispatch RemodelDemo existing dispatch area and reconfigure for office and ada restroom.Project Scope:Division Summary (MF04)01 - General Requirements $89,612.50 26 - Electrical02 - Existing Conditions $405.00 27 - Communications03 - Concrete28 - Electronic Safety and Security04 - Masonry31 - Earthwork05 - Metals32 - Exterior Improvements $31,050.0006 - Wood, Plastics, and Composites $207.20 33 - Utilities07 - Thermal and Moisture Protection34 - Transportation08 - Openings $5,934.00 35 - Waterway and Marine Transportation09 - Finishes $37,786.92 41 - Material Processing and Handling Equipment10 - Specialties $488.50 44 - Pollution Control Equipment11 - Equipment46 - Water and Wastewater Equipment12 - Furnishings $31,380.00 48 - Electric Power Generation13 - Special ConstructionAlternate $49,890.0014 - Conveying EquipmentTrades21 - Fire SuppressionAssemblies22 - PlumbingFMR23 - Heating, Ventilating, and Air-Conditioning (HVAC)MF04 Total (Without totalling components) $246,754.1225 - Integrated AutomationTotalling ComponentsPriced Line Items $246,754.12 2018 NCPA JOC National (-6.0000%) $(12,643.68)RSMeans DALLAS, TX CCI 2018, 85.40% $(36,026.10) Nonpriced Line Items Asbestos Survey $2,500.00Grand Total $200,584.34Page 1 of 4 Coppell Police Dispatch Remodel - TX COC 0028Printed 18 FEB 2018 2:30PM v2.634 Final EstimateEstimator: Matt LetlowCoppell Police Dispatch RemodelItemQuantityUnit CostDescriptionUMTotalBook01 - General Requirements 1 01-21-53-50-0550-L Cost adjustment factors, cut & patch to match existing construction, add to construction costs for particular job requirements, maximumCosts 100,000.0000 9.0000% $9,000.00RSM18FAC L, O&P 2 01-21-53-50-0550-M Cost adjustment factors, cut & patch to match existing construction, add to construction costs for particular job requirements, maximumCosts 100,000.0000 5.0000% $5,000.00RSM18FAC M, O&P 3 01-21-53-50-0850-L Cost adjustment factors, dust protection, add to construction costs for particular job requirements, maximumCosts 100,000.0000 11.0000% $11,000.00RSM18FAC L, O&P 4 01-21-53-50-0850-M Cost adjustment factors, dust protection, add to construction costs for particular job requirements, maximumCosts 100,000.0000 4.0000% $4,000.00RSM18FAC M, O&P 5 01-21-53-50-1150-L Cost adjustment factors, equipment usage curtailment, add to construction costs for particular job requirements, maximumCosts 100,000.0000 10.0000% $10,000.00RSM18FAC L, O&P 6 01-21-53-50-1150-M Cost adjustment factors, equipment usage curtailment, add to construction costs for particular job requirements, maximumCosts 100,000.0000 3.0000% $3,000.00RSM18FAC M, O&P 7 01-21-53-50-1450-L Cost adjustment factors, material handling & storage limitation, add to construction costs for particular job requirements, maximumCosts 100,000.0000 7.0000% $7,000.00RSM18FAC L, O&P 8 01-21-53-50-1450-M Cost adjustment factors, material handling & storage limitation, add to construction costs for particular job requirements, maximumCosts 100,000.0000 6.0000% $6,000.00RSM18FAC M, O&P 9 01-21-53-50-1750-L Cost adjustment factors, protection of existing work, add to construction costs for particular job requirements, maximumCosts 100,000.0000 7.0000% $7,000.00RSM18FAC L, O&P 10 01-21-53-50-1750-M Cost adjustment factors, protection of existing work, add to construction costs for particular job requirements, maximumCosts 100,000.0000 5.0000% $5,000.00RSM18FAC M, O&P 11 01-31-13-20-0160 Field personnel, general purpose laborer, average Week 4.5000 $2,575.00 $11,587.50RSM18FAC L, O&PAfter work cleanup labor. 12 01-31-13-20-0260 Field personnel, superintendent, averageWeek 3.0000 $3,675.00 $11,025.00RSM18FAC L, O&P01 - General Requirements Total $89,612.5002 - Existing Conditions 13 02-41-19-20-0100 Selective demolition, dump charges, typical urban city, building construction materials, includes tipping fees onlyTon 5.0000 $81.00 $405.00RSM18FAC M, O&P02 - Existing Conditions Total $405.0006 - Wood, Plastics, and Composites 14 06-05-05-20-1000 Selective demolition, millwork and trim, wood base cabinets L.F. 16.0000 $12.95 $207.20RSM18FAC L, O&P06 - Wood, Plastics, and Composites Total $207.20Page 2 of 4 Coppell Police Dispatch Remodel - TX COC 0028Printed 18 FEB 2018 2:30PM v2.634 Final EstimateEstimator: Matt LetlowCoppell Police Dispatch RemodelItemQuantityUnit CostDescriptionUMTotalBook08 - Openings 15 08-12-13-13-0100 Frames, steel, knock down, hollow metal, single, 16 ga., up to 5-3/4" deep, 3'-0" x 7'-0"Ea. 6.0000 $294.00 $1,764.00RSM18FAC M, L, O&P 16 08-13-13-13-1570 Doors, hollow metal, commercial, steel, flush, full panel, hollow core, 1-3/4" thick, 16 ga., 3'-0" x 7'-0"Ea. 6.0000 $695.00 $4,170.00RSM18FAC M, L, O&P08 - Openings Total $5,934.0009 - Finishes 17 09-01-70-10-0180 Gypsum wallboard, repairs, cut square, patch, sand and finish, holes, 12" to 32" squareEa. 25.0000 $112.00 $2,800.00RSM18FAC M, L, O&P 18 09-05-05-20-8200 Flooring demolition, raised access floorS.F. 1,600.0000 $2.60 $4,160.00RSM18FAC L, O&P 19 09-22-16-13-1640 Metal stud partition, non-load bearing, galvanized, 8' high, 3-5/8" wide, 25 gauge, 16" OC, includes top & bottom trackS.F. 1,050.0000 $1.54 $1,617.00RSM18FAC M, L, O&P 20 09-29-10-30-2150 Gypsum wallboard, on walls, fire resistant, taped & finished (level 4 finish), 5/8" thickS.F. 1,050.0000 $1.81 $1,900.50RSM18FAC M, L, O&P 21 09-31-13-10-5830 Ceramic tile, walls, interior, thin set, 16" x 16" S.F. 701.0000 $12.75 $8,937.75RSM18FAC M, L, O&PWalls 75x8floor 76+25 22 09-51-23-30-0820 Complete suspended ceilings, mineral fiber, Tegular, 2' x 2' x 5/8", on 9/16" grid, include standard suspension system, excl. 1-1/2" carrier channelsS.F. 1,500.0000 $5.45 $8,175.00RSM18FAC M, L, O&P 23 09-68-05-11-0107 Carpet transition strip, clamp down brass divider 12'/each (@vinyl to carpet) Ea. 8.0000 $35.00 $280.00RSM18FAC M, L, O&P 24 09-68-13-10-5060 Carpet tile, tufted nylon, 42 oz., 18" x 18" or 24" x 24" S.Y. 166.6667 $59.50 $9,916.67RSM18FAC M, L, O&P09 - Finishes Total $37,786.9210 - Specialties 25 10-28-13-13-1100 Toilet accessories, grab bars, straight, stainless steel, 36" long Ea. 1.0000 $71.50 $71.50RSM18FAC M, L, O&P 26 10-28-13-13-1105 Toilet accessories, grab bars, straight, stainless steel, 42" long Ea. 1.0000 $73.00 $73.00RSM18FAC M, L, O&P 27 10-28-13-13-1300 Toilet accessories, grab bars, straight, satin finish, 2-1/2" diameter x 36" long Ea. 1.0000 $70.50 $70.50RSM18FAC M, L, O&P 28 10-28-13-13-4300 Toilet accessories, robe hook, regular, singleEa. 1.0000 $28.50 $28.50RSM18FAC M, L, O&P 29 10-28-13-13-4600 Toilet accessories, soap dispenser, chrome, surface mounted, liquid Ea. 1.0000 $89.00 $89.00RSM18FAC M, L, O&P 30 10-28-16-20-0020 Medicine cabinets, with mirror, stainless steel frame, unlighted, 16" x 22" Ea. 1.0000 $156.00 $156.00RSM18FAC M, L, O&PPage 3 of 4 Coppell Police Dispatch Remodel - TX COC 0028Printed 18 FEB 2018 2:30PM v2.634 Final EstimateEstimator: Matt LetlowCoppell Police Dispatch Remodel10 - SpecialtiesItemQuantityUnit CostDescriptionUMTotalBook10 - Specialties Total $488.5012 - Furnishings 31 12-32-23-10-9600 Custom cabinets, rule of thumb: kitchen cabinets, excl. counters & appliances, maximumL.F. 22.0000 $540.00 $11,880.00RSM18FAC M, L, O&PKitchen and gym room 32 12-35-50-13-5800 Casework, school cabinets, wall units, 24" deep, 84" high L.F. 25.0000 $780.00 $19,500.00RSM18FAC M, L, O&P12 - Furnishings Total $31,380.0032 - Exterior Improvements 33 32-01-29-70-0115 Full depth patching of rigid pavement, light traffic, replacement preparation, 25 S.F., 6 inch depth, crushed stone and rebar, excludes truckingEa. 90.0000 $345.00 $31,050.00RSM18FAC M, L, E, O&P32 - Exterior Improvements Total $31,050.00Alternate 34 09-51-23-30-0820 Demo - Complete suspended ceilings, mineral fiber, Tegular, 2' x 2' x 5/8", on 9/16" grid, include standard suspension system, excl. 1-1/2" carrier channelsS.F. 1,500.0000 $3.26 $4,890.00CUSTOM L, O&PLabor Adjustment: 125% of $2.61 = $3.26------------------------------Using O&P PricingBare Costs: (M:$2.58 L:$1.62 E: O:250.00 LH:0.032)O&P Labor Calc = O&P Total - (Bare Material + 10.000%) - (Bare Equipment + 10.000%)$5.45 - $2.84 - $0.00 = $2.61Labor w/CCI = $2.61 * 100.000% = $2.61 35 23-05-05-10-0010 Plumbing & HVAC DEMOLITION/Custom Ductwork to include T-Stat Relocate.Relocate RR to include floor demo no replacement. ADA compatableLSum 1.0000 $45,000.00 $45,000.00CUSTOM O&PAlternate Total $49,890.00Estimate Grand Total 200,584.34Page 4 of 4 Coppell Police Dispatch Remodel - TX COC 0028Printed 18 FEB 2018 2:30PM v2.634 Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3850 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3850 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: Engineering 03/19/2018File Created: Final Action: Northlake Water Supply ContractFile Name: Title: Consider approval of a professional services agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.; to provide professional engineering services for interim improvements for the North Lake Raw Water System; for a total of $138,700.00; as budgeted in the Capital Improvement Program; and authorizing the City Manager to authorize any necessary documents. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: F. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Kimley Horn North Lake Raw Water Improvements Memo.pdf, Northlake Water Supply Study REV.pdf, North Lake Raw Water Feasibility.pdf, North Lake Raw Water Interim Improvements Contract.pdf Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 1 Ken Griffin 1 3/23/20183/22/2018 Approve 1 Jennifer Miller 2 3/23/20183/23/2018 Approve 1 Christel Pettinos - FYI 3 3/23/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3850 Title Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3850) Consider approval of a professional services agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.; to provide professional engineering services for interim improvements for the North Lake Raw Water System; for a total of $138,700.00; as budgeted in the Capital Improvement Program; and authorizing the City Manager to authorize any necessary documents. Summary Fiscal Impact: Funds are available in the 2008B CIP accounts for this contract. Staff Recommendation: The Engineering Department recommends approval. Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Ken Griffin, P.E., Director of Public Works Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Engineering Services Contract with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for professional engineering services related to the North Lake Raw Water Pumping System 2030: Sustainable City Government, Goal 3 Excellent and Well-maintained City Infrastructure and Facilities General Information:  The City has a contractual obligation to operate North Lake within a specified water elevation of a 1 foot “operating pool depth”  In 2017, the City completed a Northlake Water Supply Study with Brown & Gay Engineering (BGE) outlining three options for supplying water to meet the obligation.  The three options included: using treated water; drilling wells; or pumping raw water.  BGE recommended a raw water pumping solution via rehabilitation of the existing but inoperable intake pump station and existing 42” pipeline.  In late 2017 Kimley-Horn and Associates (KHA) was engaged to investigate the current condition of the pump station and pipeline and the cost of the rehabilitation.  KHA estimated that the rehabilitation cost for the pump station and pipeline was approximately $7.2 million with a long construction schedule.  KHA was asked to investigate alternative approaches to provide raw water to North Lake on a temporary, as-needed basis.  KHA recommends an operational solution that requires a reduced capital investment and relies on on-call pumping contractors to deliver the raw water to North Lake. Introduction: This agenda item is presented to award a professional engineering services agreement to Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc., to design improvements for the North Lake Raw Water System. This system will be designed to provide raw water to North Lake on an as-needed basis by adding minimal new infrastructure, utilizing the existing pipeline and procuring “on call (construction) pumping” contracts. This approach provides value to the City because water pumping cost is only accrued as 2 raw water is needed to supply North Lake after the site has been made ready with the construction of the pump area. History: North Lake was built in 1957 by Dallas Power and Light (later known as Luminant) as a cooling pond for a steam electric generating plant. In 2010, the power plant was decommissioned and by 2012, ownership was transferred to the City of Coppell. Cypress Waters soon began to develop around the lake. In the agreement with Cypress Waters, the City was responsible for lowering the pool elevation by 25 feet, constructing a new spillway, and lowering the elevations of the main and saddle dam. Construction of these modifications by the City was complete in 2014. Currently, North Lake has a normal pool elevation of 485’. The City has a commitment to maintain North Lake within a specified water elevation of a 1 foot “operating pool depth” by summer 2018. Analysis: To assist the City in meeting the deadline for providing water to North Lake, KHA will design improvements to the pump station intake channel, as well as a temporary road and concrete pump pad. They will also design improvements to the existing pipeline to facilitate temporary connections for the mobile pump, with four access points to the existing 42” pipeline. The scope also includes plans for a remedial creek crossing stabilization at Grapevine Creek, and modifications to the outfall channel. The opinion of probable cost suggests an upfront construction cost of approximately $1.5 million for the as-needed raw water scenario with the annual contracted pumping cost of around $60,000. This solution provides a significant cost-savings over the long-term permanent solution with an estimated cost $7.2 million plus ongoing operations and maintenance. This contract is for design and contract development support. Construction of the interim improvements and contracting for pumping services will be under future and separate contracts. Legal Review: The Purchasing Department has reviewed the documents and determined that this is an appropriate method of contracting with this firm. Fiscal Impact: The fiscal impact of this agenda item is $138,700.00 as provided in the Capital Improvement Program. Recommendation: The Public Works Department recommends approval of this contract. Technical Memorandum 1 To: Kent Collins, P.E. Mike Garza, P.E. Jamie Brierton From: Bryant Caswell, PE (Texas PE #91721) Masengu Ngenyi, PE (Texas PE #97297) Date: December 15, 2017 Subject: Northlake Water Supply Study – Phase 1 (REVISION 2) The City of Coppell is looking for alternatives to maintain specific water surface elevation in North Lake. The following Technical Memorandum was developed for analyzing the volume required to maintain the required water level in Northlake and the associated costs of both the facilities and to purchase treated or untreated wholesale water. North Lake, physically located in the City of Dallas, was originally constructed by Dallas Power and Light to provide cooling water for a power plant on the north shore. Originally, the lake did not have sufficient watershed to supply power plant operations and maintain normal water levels from rainfall. A pump station was built on Elm Fork of the Trinity River at the intersection of the river and Sandy Lake Road to supply the lake. Recently, after the decommissioning of the power plant, ownership of the lake, raw water pump station and pipeline was transferred to the City of Coppell. Contractual obligations now exist that require the City to maintain a normal pool elevation in the Northlake. Although the area of the lake has been reduced as part of the Cypress Waters development, there is still insufficient watershed to maintain the required lake level in drought years, and provide irrigation supply to Cypress Waters. This feasibility analysis evaluates three options for water supply to Northlake: Option 1) Flushing treated water from the southern sector into the Northlake watershed Option 2) Raw water via rehabilitation of the raw water pump station and pipeline Option 3) Building a well field and pumping groundwater into Northlake. This evaluation considers a comparison of infrastructure costs and their related treated or raw water wholesale purchase rates. Technical Memorandum 2 I. Existing Information The following information on the existing conditions of North Lake was obtained from the “North Lake Dam Operation and Maintenance Manual” written in September 2015. Required Pool Elevation: 484 ft-msl Surface Area @ Required Pool Elevation: 273 acres (11,891,880 sqft) Capacity @ Required Pool Elevation: 2900 acre-feet (944 Mgal) Spillway Crest Elevation: 484 ft-msl II. Estimated Water Demand The demand is composed of evaporation and irrigation demand. Drought, peak year irrigation demand was provided for the new Cypress Waters development by the City of Coppell. Evaporation and precipitation data was obtained from measurements recorded at the DFW International Airport between 2001 and 2015 as listed on the National Weather Service Weather Forecast Office. The evaporation data was obtained from measurements in Dallas County between 2000 and 2014 as listed on the Texas Water Development Board website. Two methods were used to estimate the required supplemental water supply volume. Method 1 is generally a straightforward approach of summing precipitation, evaporation and irrigation demand for the area encompassed by the lake. Method 2 utilizes the Integrated Storm Water Management (iSWM) system as developed by the NCTCOG, and considers the entire watershed that contributes runoff to Northlake. Method 1: Historical Weather Data The Annual Volume, corresponding Average & Peak Daily Flow Rates required to maintain the normal pool elevation of 484 ft-msl were calculated for maximum, minimum and average annual precipitation for maximum, minimum and average annual evaporation. To ensure a conservative estimate, the following was assumed:  Precipitation is captured within the Lake perimeter only. The watershed is not included.  Evaporation occurs when water levels in the lake are at required pool elevation which represents a surface area of 273 acres.  Worst case scenario includes peak irrigation demand of 1,250 ac-ft per year, with 15% of total taken in 3 peak months (June-August)  Average conditions include irrigation demand assumed to be half of peak demand. The estimated Daily Flow Rates, using the assumptions above, are calculated for annual precipitation conditions as measured between 2001 and 2015 in Dallas-Fort Worth. The evaporation data was obtained from measurements obtained between 2000 and 2014 in Dallas County only. Technical Memorandum 3 BEST CASE CONDITIONS Minimum Evaporation (2007) Maximum Precipitation (2007) Cypress Waters Irrigation Annual Demand Annual Vol. to maintain Normal Pool Elev. (Mgal) Average Daily Flow Rate Req. (MGD) Peak Daily Flow Rate Req. (MGD) Measured (in.) Total (Mgal) Measured (in.) Total (Mgal) (Ac-ft) (Mgal) 50.70 375.85 50.05 371.03 0.0 0.0 4.82 0.01 0.02 AVERAGE ANNUAL CONDITIONS Average Evaporation Average Precipitation Cypress Waters Irrigation Annual Demand Annual Vol. to maintain Normal Pool Elev. (Mgal) Average Daily Flow Rate Req. (MGD) Peak Daily Flow Rate Req. (MGD) Measured (in.) Total (Mgal) Measured (in.) Total (Mgal) (Ac-ft) (Mgal) 57.88 429.07 36.14 267.93 626 204 365.14 1.00 1.83 WORST CASE CONDITIONS Maximum Evaporation (2011) Minimum Precipitation (2005) Cypress Waters Irrigation Annual Demand Annual Vol. to maintain Normal Pool Elev. (Mgal) Average Daily Flow Rate Req. (MGD) Peak Daily Flow Rate Req. (MGD) Measured (in.) Total (Mgal) Measured (in.) Total (Mgal) (Ac-ft) (Mgal) 69.75 517.07 18.97 140.63 1,250 407 783.44 2.15 3.92 Method 2: iSWM™ Monthly Water Balance This analysis utilizes the Integrated Storm Water Management (iSWM) system as developed by the NCTCOG. Unlike the annual averaging used in Method 1 above, this method uses a monthly water balance approach that considers additional factors such as the watershed runoff, and spillway overflow. The water balance equation is below, with an explanation of variables and assumptions: ∆ܸൌܲ൅ܴ൅ܤെܫെܧെܧ௧ െܱ  ∆V is change in volume – or in this case the supply required to keep Northlake at level.  P is monthly precipitation – using the same worst case conditions as used in Method 1, the monthly precipitation was from 2005.  R is the runoff – a drainage basin of 1,675 acres was delineated from existing topography and the storm drain systems to calculate runoff.  B is baseflow – baseflow contributions are negligible for ponds outside of a stream system and non-existent for Northlake, thus was assumed to be 0. Technical Memorandum 4  I is infiltration into the soil – infiltration is negligible since Northlake is situated in the fatty clays overlying the Eagle Ford Shale which have very low infiltration rates, and was assume to be 0.  E is monthly evaporation - using the same worst case conditions as used in Method 1, the monthly evaporation was from 2011.  Et is evapotranspiration – evapotranspiration is only considered when wetland vegetation dominates, and was assumed to be 0.  O is overflow – the monthly surplus over the normal pool capacity which is lost over the spillway, and subtracted from the water balance if 485 ft-msl is assumed to be maintained. The graphical results for the supplemental daily flow are shown below in Figures1 and 2, and the complete water balance table is provided in Attachment A. Figure 1 – Supplemental Pumping Rates by Month for Average Case Conditions (Average Rainfall, Average Evaporation, & Half of Maximum Irrigation Demand) Figure 2 – Supplemental Pumping Rates by Month for Worst Case Conditions (Minimum Rainfall, Maximum Evaporation & Maximum Irrigation Demand) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 Supplemental Daily Flow (MGD)Required Supplemental Supply Rate Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Supplemental Daily Flow (MGD)Required Supplemental Supply Rate Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Technical Memorandum 5 The worst case scenario monthly pattern including Cypress Waters maximum irrigation demand is estimated to require a total annual supplemental supply of approximately 573 Mgal/year, with a peak supply rate of approximately 3.71 MGD (July) to maintain normal pool capacity at 484 ft-msl. The average monthly pattern including Cypress Waters average irrigation demand is estimated to require a total annual supplemental supply of approximately 64 Mgal/year, with a peak supply rate of approximately 1.36 MGD (July) to maintain normal pool capacity at 484 ft-msl. In an average year, the minimum daily supplemental flowrate required per Method 1 and 2 is estimated to be between 1.8 and 1.4 MGD respectively. In a drought year, the maximum supplemental flow rate, or peak design flowrate required, is estimated to be 3.9 to 3.7 MGD respectively. The difference in results between the methods is primarily that 2 considers the entire watershed for Northlake, and thus should be considered more accurate. III. Cost Analysis The two primary components of cost are the infrastructure improvements and the water purchase cost for each option. Since the facilities must be sized to convey the maximum rate possible, a flowrate of approximately 4.0 MGD, or 2800 gpm was assumed per the discussion above. Infrastructure Costs Treated Water – This option proposes that flushing stations be installed in the southern sector, which is the area west of Northlake south of Southwestern Blvd. This area is in the Northlake watershed and treated water flushed to the storm drain system would feed Northlake. This area also experiences water quality issues due to low usage and flushing would likely improve the flow in the pipe network and likely the water quality in the distribution system in this area. The flushing stations should be constructed to convey water from the water system to the storm drain system that flows to the lake. A flushing station should be equipped with an automatic SCADA controlled valve, meter, air gap, dechlorination chemicals and feed equipment. Three stations with 1,000 gpm discharge capacity each were assumed for adequate supply and redundancy. Treated Water Flushing Stations Flushing station piping & air gap connection $ 40,000 Dechlorinating station $ 60,000 Meter Vault with automatic valve $ 75,000 SCADA and electrical $ 25,000 Sub-total $ 200,000 Sub-total (for three stations) $ 600,000 Contingency (25%) $ 150,000 Engineering (20%) $ 150,000 Total for Three stations $ 900,000 Technical Memorandum 6 Raw Water – For a raw water supply, portions of the existing Northlake Pump Station (NPS) and pipeline could be used to deliver raw water from the Elm Fork of the Trinity River to Northlake as was done by Dallas Power and Light since the 1950’s. Due to the age, condition and size of the existing equipment it is recommended that, at a minimum, the existing pumps and electrical equipment be replaced. The costs presented in this memo assume that the existing intake structure, pump deck and influent channel can be reused with little modification or rehabilitation. However, it is possible that an entirely new intake structure and influent channel may be required. A full evaluation of the intake structure and survey of the adjacent river channel is recommended. The NPS currently has two 28 MGD pumps and one 14 MGD pump to convey water to Northlake via a 42” pipeline. The proposed maximum flowrate is approximately 4.0 MGD, which would have a maximum velocity of less than 0.6 feet per second in a 42-inch pipeline. This would allow sediment to accumulate, and ultimately pipeline blockage. To achieve non- settling velocities of three to five feet per second, a smaller pipeline of approximately 12-14 inch diameter is recommended. This newer smaller pipeline could be installed either on top of or inside of (sliplininig) the existing pipe. Northlake Raw Water Pump Station Intake improvements and dredging $ 250,000 Pumps & piping modifications $ 300,000 Demolition of ex. Station and transformer removal $ 250,000 SCADA & electrical $ 150,000 24” Transmission main (Sliplining of ex. 42”) $ 800,000 Sub-total $ 1,750,000 Contingency (25%) $ 437,500 Engineering (20%) $ 437,500 Total $ 2,625,000 Groundwater – The alternative to purchasing water is a groundwater well field supply. This option only presents cost for the infrastructure and annual O&M, as groundwater is free if available. Upon review of the Texas Water Development Board’s groundwater database, and calls to local drillers, a 6” well has been reported to produce up to 100 gpm and a 10” well may produce up to 200 gpm. To achieve a 4.0 MGD rate, or 2,800 gpm, fourteen 10” wells would be required. In addition to the wells, a network of piping would be required to bring the water from each well to an outfall structure on the lake, or multiple outfall structures as needed to limit the piping runs. Technical Memorandum 7 Well Field Water wells1 (14~10” wells at $400,000 each) $ 5,600,000 Piping and related infrastructure2 $ 350,000 Well pad site & access road $ 700,000 SCADA & electrical $ 700,000 Sub-total $ 7,350,000 Contingency (25%) $ 1,837,500 Engineering (20%) $ 1,837,500 Total $11,025,000 1. Assumes 200 gpm safe yield per well, for 4.0 MGD supply 2. Assumes 20,000 LF of 4"-6" connecting piping to multiple outfalls. Water Cost Water is currently obtained per the Wholesale Treated Water Contract between the City of Coppell and the City of Dallas dated October 27th, 1987. Per the contract, the rates established are subject to changes by the Dallas City Council. Below is a table reflecting wholesale water rates for treated and untreated water from DWU per their “Cost Study” dated June 2017. Rates Table Proposed Wholesale Rates Regular Untreated Water $ 1.02 Interruptible Untreated Water $ 0.4761 Treated Water Demand (per MGD/year) $ 280,458 Treated Water Volume $ 0.4565 Treated Water Flat Rate $ 2.2094 Rates Description  Regular Untreated Water: Raw water pumped from the source (lake or river).  Interruptible Untreated Water: Raw water during flood stage.  Treated Water Demand + Volume: Demand charge paid for operational costs plus volume charge paid per thousand gallons of water pumped.  Treated Water Flat Rate: Payment required for volume taken. If take exceeds 1 MGD, then the contract may be transferred to a “Treated Water Demand/Volume” rate. Method 2 (iSWM water balance) Annual Vol. (Mgal) Raw Water Treated Water Demand + Vol. Rate Flat Rate Best Case Weather Year 5 $ 5,100 $ 1,124,115 $ 11,032 Average Weather Year 64 $ 65,280 $ 1,151,048 $ 141,209 Worst Case Weather Year 580 $ 591,600 $ 1,386,602 $ 1,279,712 Technical Memorandum 8 Total Costs The annual costs, not including any capital expenditure or debt service, consist of water purchase, power and Operations and Maintenance (O&M), and are summarized in the table below. An average weather year is assumed and can vary for drought or wet years. O&M is assumed to be 1% of the capital cost expenditure. Annual Estimated Cost Treated Water Raw Water Well Water Water 1 $ 1,151,048 $ 65,280 $ 0 Power Cost3 $ 0 $ 9,000 $ 58,000 O&M4 $ 9,000 $ 26,250 $ 110,250 Total $ 1,160,048 $ 100,530 $ 168,250 See next table for reference notes Total Estimated Cost (20 yr. Present Value) Treated Water (Demand + Vol. Rate) Raw Water Well Water Water 1 $ 23,020,960 $ 1,305,600 $ 0 Infrastructure $ 900,000 $ 2,625,000 $ 11,025,000 Debt interest2 $ 298,000 $ 869,000 $ 3,650,000 Power Cost3 $ 0 $ 180,000 $ 1,160,000 O&M4 $ 180,000 $ 525,000 $ 2,205,000 Total $ 24,398,960 $ 5,504,600 $ 18,040,000 1. No change in water rates assumed over 20 year analysis. 2. Interest on debt assumed to be 3% per annum, for 20 year debt obligation, rounded up to nearest $1,000. 3. 5 cents/kWh assumed for electrical rate. 4. Assumed to be 1% of capital cost times 20 years. Technical Memorandum 9 IV. Discussion and Recommendations The treated water option has the lowest infrastructure cost, but it is significantly higher than the other options due to the cost to purchase the treated water from DWU, which is mostly due to the increase in the demand charge ($280,458 per MGD). If water cannot be obtained at the “Flat Rate”, it is recommended that treated water be eliminated from consideration. Groundwater would be a less expensive water supply option than treated water on an annual basis, but the infrastructure cost is high is due to the cost of drilling and completing multiple water wells and the related wellfield piping. This infrastructure could be less if the yield of the wells is higher than estimated, but the specific yield of any well cannot be determined with certainty until it is drilled and tested. It was assumed each well should be spaced 1,000 feet apart, but a hydrogeologist should be consulted before exploring this option further. No costs for easements or right-of-way were included and should be considered for access to well sites. From both a long term and short term financial perspective, a raw water supply appears to be the most attractive. The raw water purchase cost may be less if the “Interruptible Rate” can be applied, but it is only likely in the event of a wet year when the supplemental supply to Northlake will be low. Although there are some unknowns regarding the condition and feasibility of reusing the existing Northlake raw water pump station and pipeline, it costs significantly less than the other two options, and may present less risk compared to wellfield development. North Lake Raw Water System Evaluation February 2018 Prepared by: PRELIMINARY SUBMITTAL This document is released for review purposes only under the authority of Troy R. Hotchkiss, TX PE 83289 of Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. F-928 on February 14, 2018. It is not to be used for construction, bidding, or planning purposes. i Table of Contents 1. Background and Purpose ................................................ 1 2. Summary ........................................................................... 1 3. Background ....................................................................... 2 4. Regional Water Supply Context ...................................... 2 5. Hydrologic Operational Design Basis ............................ 3 6. Hydraulic Design Basis .................................................... 4 7. Facility Condition Assessment ....................................... 5 7.1 Intake ................................................................................................................................... 5 7.2 Pump Station ....................................................................................................................... 6 7.3 Pump Station Electrical and Control Systems ..................................................................... 9 7.4 42-inch Pipeline ................................................................................................................. 10 7.4.1 Condition ............................................................................................................................. 13 7.4.2 Land Ownership .................................................................................................................. 14 7.5 North Lake Raw Water Outfall Structure............................................................................ 14 7.5.1 North Lake Dam .................................................................................................................. 16 7.5.2 Dam and Spillway Summary Data....................................................................................... 18 8. Raw Water System Improvements ................................ 18 8.1 Interim Improvements ........................................................................................................ 18 8.2 Long Range Improvements ............................................................................................... 18 9. Design Criteria ................................................................ 20 10. Interim Improvements Implementation ......................... 21 10.1 Pump Station Site Improvements ...................................................................................... 21 10.1.1 Intake Channel Preparation ................................................................................................ 21 10.1.2 Channel Access Pad and Ramp ......................................................................................... 21 10.2 Pipeline Preparation .......................................................................................................... 21 10.2.1 Air Release Valves .............................................................................................................. 21 10.2.2 Grapevine Creek Crossing .................................................................................................. 22 10.3 Outfall Preparation ............................................................................................................. 22 10.3.1 Butterfly Valves ................................................................................................................... 22 10.3.2 Outfall Channel Stabilization ............................................................................................... 22 11. Permitting ........................................................................ 22 ii 11.1 US Army Corps of Engineers 404 ...................................................................................... 22 11.2 Threatened and Endangered Mussels ............................................................................... 22 11.3 Corridor Development Certificate – North Central Texas Council of Governments ........... 22 12. Assumptions and Limitations ....................................... 23 12.1 Electrical Power ................................................................................................................. 23 12.2 Existing 42-inch Pre-Stressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe’s Condition ................................... 23 13. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost ....................... 23 14. Appendices ..................................................................... 24 Appendix 1: Exhibits ....................................................................................................................... 25 Appendix 2: SHERMCO Report ...................................................................................................... 35 Appendix 3: 42-inch Pipeline Plans ................................................................................................ 36 Appendix 4: GHA Laying Plans ...................................................................................................... 37 Appendix 5: OPCC Short-Term ...................................................................................................... 38 Appendix 6: OPCC Long-Term ....................................................................................................... 39 Appendix 7: On-Call Pumping Services .......................................................................................... 40 Figures Figure 6.1: Flow vs Total Dynamic Head graph ........................................................................................ 4 Figure 7.1: Pump Station Intake Looking North ........................................................................................ 5 Figure 7.2: No. 3 Pump Bar Screen ............................................................................................................ 6 Figure 7.3: (a) Major spall below transformer and (b) typical concrete repair on pump deck .............. 7 Figure 7.4: Discharge Arrangement Pump No. 2; Facing South .............................................................. 8 Figure 7.5: Pump No. 3 Discharge Head; Facing West ............................................................................. 8 Figure 7.6: Pre-Stressed Concrete Embedded Cylinder Pipe ................................................................ 10 Figure 7.7: Typical ARV pit facing southwest at 500-LF north of Railroad ........................................... 12 Figure 7.8: Large access manhole north of Belt Line Road ................................................................... 12 Figure 7.9: Exposed pipe at Grapevine Creek Crossing facing west .................................................... 13 Figure 7.10: Trapezoidal flume-like structure at outfall structure ......................................................... 15 Figure 7.11: 12-inch butterfly valves near bottom of wall ...................................................................... 15 Figure 7.12: Original outfall channel location ......................................................................................... 16 Figure 7.13: New spillway plan and profile .............................................................................................. 17 Figure 7.14: Spillway weir (intake) section .............................................................................................. 17 iii Tables Table 7.1: Spillway Data ............................................................................................................................ 18 Table 7.2: Lake Data .................................................................................................................................. 18 Table 8.1: Pump and Pipeline Hydraulics ................................................................................................ 20 Table 8.2: Proposed Pump Assumptions ................................................................................................ 20 Table 8.3: Intake Channel Geometry ........................................................................................................ 20 Table 8.4: Temporary Solution Assumptions .......................................................................................... 21 1 1. Background and Purpose The City of Coppell is evaluating options to maintain the level of North Lake to serve the Cypress Waters Development surrounding North Lake. The Cypress Waters development includes the lake as a key aesthetic feature as well as a source of irrigation water for the development. The City of Coppell plans to utilize the North Lake Raw Water Delivery system to maintain the pool elevation in North Lake. Given the projected cost and time to refurbish the existing raw water pump station and pipeline, the City has requested Kimley-Horn and Associates (KHA) to develop a cost-effective approach to providing raw water to North Lake on a temporary, as-needed basis. The temporary solution desired should maximize existing infrastructure and minimize cost. This study presents our analysis and recommendation for a temporary solution other than relying on the potable water distribution system. The main three components evaluated in this study are: the raw water pump station and intake at Elm Fork of the Trinity River, the existing 42-inch pre-stressed concrete cylinder pipe (PCCP), and the outfall structure at North Lake. See Exhibit 2 in Appendix 1. 2. Summary The existing raw water system was designed to pump significantly larger volumes of water than are anticipated? to serve North Lake in the future. This makes restoring the existing pumps, motors, controls, and associated heavy electrical gear impractical regardless of their condition. The pump station was deenergized by ONCOR when it was turned over to the City and has not been maintained since. The electrical and mechanical systems (pumps and motors) are well past their service lives and appear to be in very poor or deteriorated condition. The recommended long-range plan for the raw water system will depend largely on the condition and remaining service life of the existing 42-inch pipe between the river intake and North Lake. Reliably assessing the pipe’s condition is infeasible at this time as there were no access points provided in its original design and construction. After stabilizing the existing pipeline and assessing its condition, the long-term plan for the system can be determined with greater confidence. Kimley-Horn recommends targeted pipeline improvements to add access points, shore up known deficiencies, and remove components no longer needed. Adding an accessible pump connection point at the pump station will allow temporary pumping facilities to utilize the pipeline in the short term. Stabilizing the crossing at Grapevine Creek is needed to assure the pipeline is not structurally compromised by the eroding creek banks and undermining channel bottom. The existing outfall structure configuration adds unnecessary pumping head and may present an attractive nuisance for vandals and should be partially demolished. See Exhibit 7 for conceptual hydraulic profile. To provide temporary, as-needed raw water to North Lake, Kimley-Horn recommends that the City of Coppell procure “on call (construction) pumping” contracts. This would be similar to contractor procurement of open cut dewatering subcontractors. There are at least three reputable, reliable construction dewatering service providers in the Dallas area that can provide competitive turnkey or simple equipment rental contracts for the City’s needs. Some of the actions required to make this option viable involve minor site work to make the existing intake channel accessible and sufficiently functional for this purpose, as well as a new connection to the existing 42-inch PCCP line. See Exhibit 9. This approach provides value to the City of Coppell since water pumping cost is only accrued as raw water is needed 2 to supply North Lake after the site has been made ready after the construction of the pump. Budgets to provide this service are presented in Appendix 7. 3. Background The City of Coppell owns the North Lake Raw Water System that includes several discrete infrastructure elements. These elements include the raw water pump station, transmission pipeline, and North Lake outfall structure. See Exhibit 2 in Appendix 1. The pump station includes an intake structure on the Elm Fork of the Trinity River, several vertical turbine pumps and associated mechanical and electrical support systems, as well as a massive, high voltage transformer. An existing 42-inch concrete pressure pipe connects the pump station with North Lake and discharges into the lake near the left (northern) abutment of the dam via a previously-submerged outfall structure. This infrastructure was constructed in the mid-1950’s as part of the former Dallas Power & Light Company (DP&L) North Lake Steam Electric Station. 4. Regional Water Supply Context Surface water resources in Texas are scarce and their allocation has become highly regulated, and in some cases, litigious. The Elm Fork of the Trinity River, the source of raw water supply for North Lake, does not always have a reliable quantity of flow for all the adjudicated uses of the river’s water. While water supply and availability analyses are beyond the scope of this present work, it is important to understand that the river system can become overused by other, “higher value” purposes (drinking water) leaving none for North Lake. The City of Dallas holds several water rights in the Elm Fork that allow diversion of water from the River, which provides water to Dallas’ Elm Fork and Bachman Water Treatment Plants (WTPs). The water in the Elm Fork consists of stored water released from Lakes Lewisville and Grapevine, and return flows from two wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), as operated by the Cities of Lewisville and Flower Mound, as well as run-of-the-river water originating downstream of Lakes Lewisville and Grapevine. These lakes and WTPs are shown in Exhibit 1 in Appendix 1. Lake Grapevine is owned and operated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and is located in Denton and Tarrant Counties on Denton Creek, a tributary to the Elm Fork. See Exhibit 1. Dallas has a water right to store 85,000 acft and rights to divert up to 75.9 MGD (85,000 acft/yr) for municipal, domestic, industrial, recreational, and manufacturing uses from the Lake. Lake Lewisville is likewise owned and operated by the USACE and is located in Denton County on the Elm Fork downstream of Lake Ray Roberts. Prior to the construction of Lake Lewisville, Dallas operated Lake Dallas at a site 9.4 miles upstream of the Lake Lewisville dam site. Dallas has a water right to store 549,976 acft in Lake Lewisville and rights to divert up to 491.0 MGD (549,976 acft/yr) for municipal, domestic, industrial, irrigation, recreational, and hydroelectric power generation (non-consumptive) uses. The City of Dallas also owns a run-of-river water right authorizing a combined 35.7 MGD (40,000 acft/yr) of diversions from the Elm Fork Trinity River at its Bachman and Elm Fork WTP diversion sites (Fraser and Carrollton Dams, respectively). This right is subject to a combined diversion rate of 640.73-cfs from the two diversion sites and includes special environmental flow conditions (which Dallas is required to honor) that periodically limit diversions. The Dallas Long Range Water Supply Plan, as updated in October 2014, provides for a planned 4.5-MGD raw water demand on their system. It is listed in Tables ES-1 and 2-1 – Summary of Dallas Customers – Current and Projected 3 2070 Demands - as “Steam Electric Uses” with a footnote referring to a “Luminant Contract.” As paraphrased from Dallas’s Cost Study background information, the Plan serves to guide the City of Dallas to assure that its customer water supply obligations are always met if possible and reasonable. 5. Hydrologic Operational Design Basis The City’s commitment to operate the lake within a specified “operating band” and Cypress Waters’ projected water usage informs the sizing of the pumps and pipelines associated with the North Lake Raw Water System. Of equal importance is the City’s preferred mode of operation. Essentially the decision to refill the lake very quickly after it has been drawn down versus lower rate, but more frequent pumping to avoid significant lake surface draw-down. Allowing North Lake to operate on a cyclic fill-and-draw approach where the lake is re-filled at a comparatively high rate after being drawn down to its lower operating level would require greater pumping capacity, larger equipment, and a larger pipeline. Conversely, a lower-rate pumpage arrangement that seeks to maintain the lake surface much closer to its full level could achieve economies in equipment sizing. The North Lake Dam O&M Manual suggests a 1-foot “operating pool depth.” A 1-foot “operating pool depth” would allow Cypress Waters to irrigate continuously for 2½ weeks at their proposed maximum flow (5.2-MGD). Realistic peak irrigation would only occur for about 10 hours at night during the summer watering season, extending the life of the full pool to a full six weeks. Similarly, the pool life could extend to nearly 3 months at continuous average day flows without being refilled. The concept of operations (for the lake and the pump station) are further confounded by the uncertainty of water being available to the City in the Elm Fork. The City does not currently have a contract for raw water. A DRAFT version of a water supply contract with Dallas was reviewed, and that document indicates that Dallas is not promising a reliable raw water supply noting, “The sale of untreated water to meet the requirements of Purchaser is subject to and limited by the available system supply (as determined by the Dallas Director of Water Utilities).” The City of Dallas owns the vast majority of water rights in the local segment of the Elm Fork. Planning for such highly constrained and uncertain water demands becomes quite complex with little certainty. To facilitate decision-making, a number of simplifying assumptions must be made. These include: 1. Providing capacity to match the Cypress Waters Peak Day Demand. 2. Operating the system conservatively (e.g. begin refilling the lake well ahead of forecasted needs, but at a reduced rate). 3. Assuming water will be available in the Elm Fork when needed without respect to Dallas and US Army Corps reservoir operating strategies. 4. Emergency lake filling can be accomplished by alternative means if necessary via the drinking water system (e.g. blowdown the southern sector to the storm drain system that feeds the lake). These issues would form the basis of sizing and operating the system and are fundamentally tied to Water Rights commitments from the two upstream lakes: Grapevine and Lewisville. Being able to rely solely on the intake pump station on the Elm Fork is dependent in large part on water availability, presumably through Dallas’ water rights and reservoir release coordination schedule with the Corps of Engineers. 4 6. Hydraulic Design Basis As noted in the previous section, there are a number of contractual and operational variables to consider when sizing the raw water transmission facilities. For simplicity, we have adopted 5-MGD (3,475-GPM) as the design basis for selecting pumps and equipment as well as sizing the pipeline. Static head on the system is the difference between the outlet box bottom (assuming that the existing still well wall is demolished thereby removing 10-ft of unnecessary head) and the normal pool in the Elm Fork (e.g. 510.0-ft MSL-10-ft – 433-ft MSL; net 67.0-ft of static head). Friction head is generally derived from an assumed 5-ft/sec pipe velocity. Assuming that a relatively light wall HDPE pipe will be installed as the transmission line inside the existing 42-inch concrete host pipe, we selected DR 17 (125- psi), the nearest pipe size that is a nominal 20-inch pipe with internal diameter of 17.5-inches. The design flow in the selected pipe size produces a velocity of 4.6-ft/sec, within the ideal range of economic pumping and scouring velocity to flush fines and sediment that settle in the pipe when not in operation. Minor losses are estimated to be about 2.0-ft of additional head loss. These factors combine to arrive at a design duty point of 119.0-ft TDH at 3,475-gpm for the mid-range of expected pipe roughness coefficients: C=130. The head could range between 112-ft and 127-ft depending on pipe roughness. See Figure 6.1. Figure 6.1: Flow vs Total Dynamic Head 5 7. Facility Condition Assessment 7.1 Intake The existing river intake structure is an open-water concrete structure built on the west bank of the Elm Fork of the Trinity River. See Exhibit 3 in Appendix 1. The structure has three individual pump “bays” that can be isolated from the river with removable stop logs. To isolate any given pump bay, the stop logs would be placed in log guides (channels) cast into each pump bay’s walls. The logs and guides would be accessed from removable hatches in the operating deck. No stop logs are known to exist for this facility. It appears that the pumps in the two southernmost bays were installed as part of the original construction with a single 14’-0” wide bar screen protecting both bays. See Figure 7.1. The only construction plans available (DP&L Plan Sheet G-147465. See Appendix 3) seem to show the northern pump bay as an “open cell”. Structural telltale signs observed during our site visit and the odd wooden “fore-structure” on the river side of the northern bar screen seem to indicate that the third (northern) pump was installed at some point later in the life of this pump station. The water level in the intake is controlled by the uncontrolled spillway at the Carrollton Dam some 300-LF downstream of the intake. Figure 7.1: Pump Station Intake Looking North The bar screens appear to be fabricated from 3/8-inch by 2-inch bar stock on 2-inch spacings. See Figure 7.2. The portion of the screens that are visible from the adjoining bank appear to be showing a fair amount of rust as would be expected for a structure of this age. The steel appears to be in generally good condition above the waterline. Removing and repairing or re-fabricating the rust-damaged sections of the screens should be considered while other heavy restoration work is ongoing at the pump station and heavy lift equipment is mobilized. KHA staff performed sounding of the sediment accumulation immediately behind (pump station side) the bar screens. We used a 1/2-inch stainless steel rod to sound the level of mud and silt relative to the top of the 6 working platform (assumed elevation of 442). Moving from north to south (north edge of the northern pump bay to the southern edge of the north pump bay to the middle of the southern pump bay), the sediment sounded 8’-4”, 9’-2,” and 12’-3” below the working platform. If the bottom of the pump bays is at elevation 426.0 as shown on the DP&L drawing, this translates to between 7’-8” and 3’-9” of sediment (at least at the points sounded). This may translate to roughly 100-200-CY of accumulated sediment. The bays and channel leading up to the intake structure should be dredged to return the pump station to its former intake capacity and avoid damage to the pump impellers and other equipment. Figure 7.2: No. 3 Pump Bar Screen 7.2 Pump Station As noted on the previous page, it appears that the pump station has been substantially expanded or rehabilitated in the past. A number of old floor penetrations have been removed and patched. The pad under the existing electrical transformer does not appear to be original to the pump station. There is a major spall 7 on the bottom of the structural platform supporting the transformer near the mid-span of the concrete deck between the four adjoining columns. See Figures 7.3a and 7.3b. It is unknown if the new transformer pad was added as a corrective structural feature to redistribute the mass of the transformer between the piers and reduce the moment load between them. (a) (b) Figure 7.3: (a) Major spall below transformer and (b) Typical concrete repair on pump deck The pump discharge heads and isolation butterfly valves are located in the pump bays below the pump operating deck. The pumps discharge through the back (west) wall of each pump bay. Pump motors and valve operators are attached to the pump operating deck. The age of the equipment and appurtenances appears to vary from unit to unit. For instance, the body of the valve operator and the spool piece on the No. 2 pump discharge shows considerable amounts of corrosion, whereas the flexible coupling adapter joining the spool to the discharge head appears to be relatively new. See Figure 7.4. Likewise, pump No. 3 appears to be of a newer make than the other two. See Figure 7.5. 8 Figure 7.4: Discharge Arrangement Pump No. 2 (Facing South) Figure 7.5: Pump No. 3 Discharge Head (Facing West) 9 7.3 Pump Station Electrical and Control Systems The North Lake Intake Pump Station was originally owned by Dallas Power and Light and later transferred to Luminant. It was deactivated in about 2012 and given to the City of Coppell. Because it is in a flood plain, the pump station mechanical gear was constructed as a platform with the pumps and electrical equipment on top, above the 100 year flood level. The facility has a 138-kV transmission feed to it with a 4160-volt transformer with a rated at 3750-kVA on the platform, see Exhibit 4 in Appendix 1. Adjacent to the platform is a 138-kV transmission tower where the 138-kV line dead-ends for the pump station. A 138-kV disconnect switch is mounted at the tower base at about the same level as the top mounted 138 kV bushings on the transformer. The existing electrical load consists of three vertical pumps with motors on the platform deck and some miscellaneous auxiliary loads. The motors for the pumps are 450-hp, 900-hp, and 1000-hp. They are 4160- volt, three-phase induction motors. Each pumping unit has a motorized valve. There is also site lighting and power for instrumentation and controls. The main switchgear is 4160-volts and is located in a weather protected enclosure. It was manufactured by General Electric in 1956. The switchgear is used as a main breaker and additional breakers are used as pump motor starters. The motors are started across-the-line. The facility was deactivated and the equipment de-energized about the time that it was given to the City of Coppell. The 138-kV switch on the transmission tower is open. The equipment on the platform has been sitting de-energized for many years. On April 17, 2015, SHERMCO Industries did equipment testing and an evaluation of all the major electrical equipment on the platform. A copy of the report provide by SHERMCO is attached as Appendix 2. The 138-kV to 4160-volt transformer has a manufacture date of 1966, and it appears, given the concrete deck under the transformer and the manufacture date, that this unit is not the original transformer. The SHERMCO report indicated that the transformer failed the winding insulation test and that several of the high voltage bushings were faulty. The SHERMCO report recommended that the transformer be replaced. Typically, a transformer repair facility would not accept a transformer with this amount of failed components. In addition, most 138-kV transformers are substation transformers with a 15-kV secondary and a much higher kVA rating. So the transformer is more of a one-off or custom transformer. It is basically scrap metal. The SHERMCO report had an oil analysis done of the transformer oil, and the lab results indicated it was mineral oil. The manufacturer of the transformer is Westinghouse. EPA guidelines for determining if a transformer has had Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) state that Westinghouse transformers manufactured before 1979 are not certified to be PCB free. However, the lab results from the oil analysis states that the oil tested to have 37-ppm PCBs. Oil with 50-ppm or more PCBs are considered hazardous. The transformer most likely originally had PCBs, but at some point was remediated by Oncor before it was turned over to the City. The SHERMCO report stated that they did not test the oil for PCBs in the three small oil filled transformers that step down from 4160-volts to 120/240-volts. These are located on the small tower next to the 4160-volt switchgear. It is recommended that the oil be tested before these transformers are removed. SHERMCO also tested the 4160-volt switchgear and stated in the report that the overall condition is poor and recommended replacement. The report went into great detail about missing parts, only one would operate, and poor condition of the protective relays. Several manufacturers of re-manufactured obsolete electrical 10 switchgear were contacted about salvage value, but none responded. Typically, the only value to this is, if they are interested, that they would come get it and remove it at no charge. The pump motors were tested by SHERMCO as well. Two of the pumps failed the insulation test and one pump passed. The report did not state if the motors were repairable by rewinding and bearing replacement. In summary, all of the existing electrical equipment is too deteriorated to be rebuilt or refurbished. It should be considered scrap metal with the possible exception of the motors. In addition, the new load is so much smaller than the existing load, that the equipment is either oversized or the wrong voltage. 7.4 42-inch Pipeline The only design drawings of the existing “North Lake Supply Line” located to date refer to the pipeline as “42- IN CONCRETE PRESSURE PIPE”. See Appendix 3. This pipe would appear to be a low pressure concrete pre-stressed embedded cylinder pipe manufactured by the former Gifford-Hill America (GHA) in Grand Prairie. A poor-quality scan of what is believed to be the original GHA laying plans was obtained by KHA through a third party is included as Appendix 4. The pressure ratings referred to on the laying plan comport with the DP&L Plan Sheet G-147465 shows the pipe pressure rating as 110-psi for the segment between the lake to about 300-ft north of MacArthur Blvd and 150-psi from there to the pump station. Figure 7.6: Pre-Stressed Concrete Embedded Cylinder Pipe The design alignment of the pipeline has been reconstructed by KHA using a combination of City-provided GIS files and the GHA pipe laying plans as well as the DP&L original design plan sheet. The surface features (ARV pits) located in the field were correlated to the design plan sheet and GHA fabrication plans to harmonize the final alignment stationing in the field to comport with the GHA laying plans. The GHA laying plans and the ARV pits located in the field match very well. Exhibit 5 in Appendix 1 reflects our reconstruction of the alignment with the various data sources. 11 The pipeline was built in 1956 and generally followed the alignment of the former “Old Dallas Denton Road” from the river to the DP&L power transmission corridor. That road has since been renamed Sandy Lake Road when it was rebuilt, widened, and realigned/reconfigured. Where the pipeline is in relation to the road is uncertain as there were no surface features located that validate the alignment shown in the GIS data. From Sandy Lake Road, the pipeline turns south and appears to parallel the high voltage transmission line as it runs roughly north-south to the south side of Belt Line Road. South of Belt Line Road, the alignment turns east-west and appears from field observation to run parallel to and roughly 15-ft inside the south edge of the easement. Where the power corridor meets North Lake Boulevard, the pipeline appears to turn southwest toward the lake outfall. DP&L Plan Sheet G-147465 indicates that the pipeline was concrete encased where it was constructed within the old configuration of Sandy Lake Road (Old Denton Dallas Road) and placed on a concrete cradle where it crossed other then-existing roads. This plan sheet also indicates that the pipeline was installed in an open tunnel under the Fort Worth and Western Railroad embankment that parallels the north side of Belt Line Road (formerly known as Carrollton-Coppell Road) on sand bedding with bricked end plugs, but no annular fill. Construction plans for a number of crossing structures built after the pipeline was installed should be reviewed as part of any detailed design. These crossings include: 1. The widening and re-construction of Sandy Lake Road (formerly the Dallas-Denton Road, City of Coppell) 2. MacArthur Boulevard, (City of Coppell 3. Belt Line Road (formerly Carrollton-Coppell Road, City of Coppell) 4. The pedestrian bridge across the power transmission corridor that connects Starleaf Street with the cul-de-sac at the western end of Bradford Drive, City of Coppell 5. The concrete drive that connects Hidden Hollow Court with the retail/commercial development at the southwest corner of MacArthur Boulevard and Riverchase Drive, City of Coppell Limited field investigations (walks) revealed what appear to be air release valve pits generally in the vicinity of where they are indicated on DP&L Plan Sheet G-147465. See Exhibit 5 in Appendix 1. The apparent construction of these facilities appears to conform in general with the details appearing on the DP&L Plan sheet. They appear to be approximately 36-inch round cast concrete covers set in what appears to be the bell of a 36-inch concrete pipe segment. Most are “marked” with a wooden fence post or bollard. See Figure 7.7. The manhole closest to and north of the railroad crossing is a larger structure, but of similar design, as shown in Figure 7.8. 12 Figure 7.7: Typical ARV Pit Facing Southwest at 500-LF North of Railroad Figure 7.8: Large Access Manhole North of Belt Line Road 13 7.4.1 Condition The condition of the existing pipeline is uncertain. Discussions with James Howe, a member of staff familiar with the line, indicate that until the time that it was effectively removed from service, there were no known issues with the line. The pipe is exposed at the Grapevine Creek crossing/grade control structure as seen in Figure 7.9 below. The crossing is located at the southern (downstream) edge of the power corridor where the creek exists the corridor. The driven pile grade control structure installed as part of the pipeline appears to have been flanked on the east side by the creek. Some 12-ft to 15-ft of pipe are exposed where the creek has washed away its backfill, but appears to be intact. Figure 7.9: Exposed Pipe at Grapevine Creek Crossing Facing West 14 7.4.2 Land Ownership Pipeline: While substantial excavation is not contemplated, points of access and surface stringing of HDPE pipe along the alignment would be a consideration. Accordingly, coordination with surface ownership rights remains a major consideration. Exhibit 8 in Appendix 1 shows KHA’s preliminary research based on Dallas County Appraisal District GIS data. Grapevine Creek Crossing: As noted elsewhere, the crossing of Grapevine Creek has been compromised and some form of channel stabilization will be required. Grapevine Creek forms the boundary between Coppell and the City of Irving The west side of the crossing would be completed in the City of Irving. Because this section is within the power transmission corridor, land ownership is not believed to be a significant issue. However, design, construction, and maintenance of channel stabilization structures would need to be coordinated if not approved by the City of Irving. Raw Water Pump Station: The pump station site is shown in Dallas County Appraisal District online GIS data to be the property of the City of Coppell as shown on Exhibit 8. The site includes the physical pump station itself, a small trapezoid generally conforming to the intake channel into the river, the parking area between the pump platform and the retaining wall that forms the west boundary of the main site, and a roughly boot-shaped extension that covers most of the north-south access road, but not the gate. The access from Sandy Lake Road to the gate crosses property owned by the Carrollton Farmers Branch ISD. 7.5 North Lake Raw Water Outfall Structure The existing outfall structure is located near the left abutment of the dam. See Exhibit 6 in Appendix 1. The structure was designed to provide a flooded pipe discharge in a stilling basin that overflowed a weir wall that appears to have been set near the original lake’s operating surface, approximate elevation 510-ft-msl. We infer that the outfall was designed this way to prevent draining the lake in the event of a pump station or control valve failure. The 42-inch raw water pipeline enters the structure via a normally submerged, trapezoidal flume- like structure. See Figure 7.10. The weir wall is fitted with dual 12-inch butterfly valves near the bottom of the wall. See Figure 7.11. These appear to have been added after the original wall construction, but their purpose is unclear. Each outlet has two butterfly valves in series with the one closest to the wall operated from the outfall platform, the other with a standard AWWA square operating nut on the valve that would have normally been below the water’s surface. The existing outlet structure was effectively “stranded” by the lowering of the lake and consequential lateral movement of the “shoreline”. Review of aerial photography during construction of the spillway improvements in 2014 shows that the “outfall” channel is now nearly 850-LF long from the original outfall structure to the apparent lake edge. See Figure 7.12. 15 Figure 7.10: Trapezoidal Flume-Like Structure at Outfall Structure Figure 7.11: 12-Inch Butterfly Valves Near Bottom of Wall 16 Figure 7.12: Original Outfall Channel Location The operation and maintenance of the outfall channel should be carefully considered in the final project configuration. As it exists today, the channel is normally dry. Because it was a manmade channel in uplands, it can be expected to be highly susceptible to erosion. If the land use around the channel is intended for public access or development, routine maintenance access as public safety (crossing) considerations should be accounted for. To minimize maintenance, soft armor revetment for the channel bottom and banks should be considered. 7.5.1 North Lake Dam Construction of North Lake Dam was completed in August 1957 by Dallas Power and Light as a cooling pond for a steam electric generating plant. Luminant Power Company (formerly Dallas Power and Light) ceased operations at the station in 2010 and began decommissioning the power generation facilities. In 2012, Luminant transferred ownership of the dam to the City of Coppell ahead of the Cypress Waters development around the lake. The development agreement associate with Cypress Waters included provisions to lower the normal pool elevation approximately 25 feet from 510 feet‐msl to 485 feet‐msl. These modifications included the construction of a new drop inlet spillway, lowering the crest elevation of both the main dam and saddle dam, and flattening the downstream slopes of both the main dam and saddle dam. See Figures 7.13 and 7.14. Construction of the new spillway and embankment modifications was completed in December 2014. 17 Figure 7.13: New Spillway Plan and Profile Figure 7.14: Spillway Weir (Intake) Section 18 7.5.2 Dam and Spillway Summary Data Table 7.1: Spillway Data Spillway Type: Rectangular Concrete Drop Inlet and Conduit Location: Right Abutment Crest Elevation: 485.0-feet‐msl Crest Length (Total): 30-feet Inlet Dimensions: 5‐feet by 20‐feet (interior) Conduit Dimensions: 5‐feet by 5‐feet Table 7.2: Lake Data Lake: Normal Pool Elevation: 485.0-feet‐msl Surface Area at Normal Pool: 289-acres Capacity at Normal Pool: 3,199-acre‐feet Effective Top of Dam Elevation: 508.5-feet‐msl Surface Area at Top of Dam: 713-acres Capacity at Top of Dam: 14,871-acre‐feet 8. Raw Water System Improvements The cost associated with full rehabilitation/replacement of the North Lake Raw Water System may not be a wise investment for the City at this time. Kimley-Horn recommends a progressive investment strategy to restoring pumping capability in the existing North Lake Raw Water System. The short-term plan would include on-call temporary contract pumping together with minor stabilization and rehabilitation work to allow the pipeline to be utilized for conveyance. 8.1 Interim Improvements Kimley-Horn recommends targeted pipeline improvements to add access points, shore up known deficiencies, and remove components no longer needed. Adding an accessible pump connection point at the pump station will allow temporary pumping facilities to utilize the pipeline in the short term. Stabilizing the crossing at Grapevine Creek is needed to assure the pipeline is not structurally compromised by the eroding creek banks and undermining channel bottom. The existing outfall structure configuration adds unnecessary pumping head and may present an attractive nuisance for vandals and should be partially demolished. The recommended interim improvements are more fully described in Section 10. 8.2 Long Range Improvements The recommended long-range plan for the raw water system will depend in large part on the condition and remaining service life of the existing 42-inch pipe between the river intake and North Lake. Reliably assessing the pipe’s condition is infeasible at this time as there were no access points provided in its original design and construction. After stabilizing the existing pipeline and assessing its condition, the long-term plan for the system can be determined with greater confidence. 19 As noted previously, the existing 42-inch line is far too large for the service contemplated, regardless of condition. While it may be possible to utilize it on a short-term basis, the very low velocities anticipated would not provide sufficient scouring velocity and the pipe sags (creek crossings and low points) tend to accumulate sediment and debris and eventually lead to plugging when scouring velocities are not achieved. Large diameter concrete raw water pipes are susceptible to biogenic corrosion. This is caused by the very long retention times of nutrient rich raw water that develops a “slime” layer that is known to attack/corrode bare concrete. There a few examples of this phenomenon in North Texas. For these reasons, we would not recommend that approach as a long-term solution. The existing 42-inch line could serve as a host pipe for smaller, more hydraulically-appropriate carrier pipe – effectively a 12,000-LF tunnel. The carrier pipe material selection and installation details would need to be carefully considered. While a detailed preliminary design of such a system is beyond the scope of this present work, the following logic could be applied to a possible “Slip lining” approach using high density polyethylene pipe as the carrier: 1. At existing high points (ARVs): a. Remove one or two sections of existing pipe b. Pull a length of pre-fused HDPE pipe into the 42-inch host pipe from the upstream direction c. Pull a length of pre-fused HDPE pipe into the 42-inch host pipe from the downstream direction d. Fusion weld on an upturned base tee branch saddle for setting a new ARV in a massive concrete base with thrust rings cast in to avoid thermal expansion forces from putting stress on the branch tee 2. At existing low points (blowoffs, sags between existing ARVs, intermediate pull points as needed to safely pull the designed length of carrier pipe): a. Fusion weld on a downturned base tee branch saddle for setting a blowoff valve and riser assembly in a massive concrete base with thrust rings cast in to avoid thermal expansion forces from putting stress on the branch tee 3. Seal the ends of the host pipe where the carrier enters and exists to minimize longitudinal water seepage. 4. Place a cement-stabilized sand or low-strength flowable around the host pipe entry point and the “exposed” carrier pipe (where the 42-inch pipe joints were removed) to provide long term, stable support of the pipe where it is not otherwise laying on the floor of the host pipe. The condition of the exiting pump station and the hydraulic design of the existing raw water system to convey significantly larger volumes of water than are now planned to serve North Lake make significant investments in restoring the existing pumps and electrical gear an undesirable investment. Other than minor spall patching and crack injection work, the physical pump structure appears to be in serviceable condition. It could be re- purposed with new submersible pumps and discharge piping and controls. New, three phase power would need to be run into the site to make it operable as a stand-alone facility. 20 9. Design Criteria The following tables include assumptions, dimensions, elevations and other important details taken into consideration during the system evaluation: Table 8.1: Pump and Pipeline Hydraulics Pump and Pipeline Hydraulics Flow 5-mgd (per BGE Tech memo dated December 2017) Pipeline 42-in PCCP Velocity 0.8-ft/s Outfall El 501.0 (assumed 12” BFV at Outfall Structure) Intake El 433.0 (Carrollton Dam Weir) Static Head 68-ft (28.2 psi) Friction Head 0.9-ft TDH 69-ft (28.6 psi) Connection 12” flanged connection added to existing 42” pipe above ground Table 8.2: Proposed Pump Assumptions Pump Condition Interim/Short Term (On Call Contracting) Long Term Pump Class End Suction Centrifugal (Self Priming) Submersible Solids Handling Size 12” 11” - 13” Impeller; 8” Discharge Driver Gas/Diesel Engine 130 - 150 HP Electrical Fuel Demand 10-12 gal/hr at full load 3P 480v Fuel Storage 300+ gal belly tank N/A Sound Attenuation Sound Proofing N/A Table 8.3: Intake Channel Geometry Intake Channel Geometry Trapezoidal Bottom Elevation 426.0 Bottom Width 28.0-ft Top Width 70-ft Length 30-ft 21 Table 8.4: Temporary Solution Assumptions Temporary Pump Pad Width 20-ft Surface Elevation 435.0 Access Ramp Width 20-ft Grade 10% Length 50-ft Fill Rock, rubble gravel Surface 12-in flex-base Armor 100-lb class dumped rock rip rap 10. Interim Improvements Implementation 10.1 Pump Station Site Improvements 10.1.1 Intake Channel Preparation The formed trapezoidal intake channel from the Elm Fork river to the existing raw water pump station bar screens has been substantially plugged with flood-induced sediment and organic muck. The channel should be mechanically restored to its original general lines and grades and the resultant wet muck be staged on the site to dry prior to hauling and disposal at some other location or landfilled. 10.1.2 Channel Access Pad and Ramp The intake channel is not currently accessible from the existing parking north and west of the raw water pump station and intake structure. A ramp should be constructed and a pad installed to allow staging of a temporary pump with its intake (suction line) placed in the intake channel to provide some protection from floating debris in the main river channel. To stabilize the ramp, large rock riprap should be placed on its slopes and edges. The ramp should be constructed of free-draining materials and surfaced with a nominal 12-inch thick road base driving course. Sediment and muck from the plugged intake channel should not be used for ramp fill materials. 10.2 Pipeline Preparation While the pipeline is assumed to be serviceable for the limited purposes of this report, there are several items that the City of Coppell should consider undertaking prior to placing the line back into service. These include: 10.2.1 Air Release Valves The existing air release valves should be located, inspected and replaced, if necessary. This would also afford the opportunity to remove the 10-inch flanges at those locations and possibly allow for limited internal inspection by CCTV. This would require draining the pipe. 22 10.2.2 Grapevine Creek Crossing The channel grade stabilization structure and pipeline crossing at Grapevine creek has been flanked by the stream and several sections of the pipeline are exposed in the bottom of the channel. The crossing should be stabilized at least temporarily until a long-term permanent solution can be installed. 10.3 Outfall Preparation 10.3.1 Butterfly Valves The serviceability of the existing butterfly valves should be evaluated and corrected if found inoperable. 10.3.2 Outfall Channel Stabilization Filling the lake, that is now normally at 485-ft, via an outfall structure that has a flowline of about 500- ft will lead to substantial scour in the unlined and unvegetated channel that was formerly submerged in the lake bottom prior to it being lowered. 11. Permitting 11.1 US Army Corps of Engineers 404 The Maintenance portion of the Nationwide Permit 3 authorizes the removal of accumulated sediments and debris in the vicinity of existing structures, including water intake structures. The permit also authorizes the placement of new or additional riprap to protect existing structures. Therefore, no pre-constructions notice (PCN) is believed to be required. Kimley-Horn is pending validation by a qualified environmental professional. 11.2 Threatened and Endangered Mussels Protected mussel species are known to be in this section of the Elm Fork of the Trinity River, but may not be present in the materials to be disturbed. 11.3 Corridor Development Certificate – North Central Texas Council of Governments The proposed temporary ramp should be considered a temporary fill and a negligible impact on the hydraulics of the Elm Fork river just 300-ft upstream of the Sandy Lake Road bridge and Carrollton Dam bottleneck. However, preparing a Corridor Development Certificate (CDC) exemption should be considered, especially in light of other authorities having jurisdiction immediately adjacent to the project. 23 12. Assumptions and Limitations 12.1 Electrical Power The existing pump station has been disconnected from the electrical grid and the cost to restore appropriate service is anticipated to be excessive. The time, permitting, and legal machinations (easements across properties owned by third parties) required to restore electrical service are equally prohibitive. Hence, any solution would require its own source(s) of power. 12.2 Existing 42-inch Pre-Stressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe’s Condition The physical condition of the existing 42-inch PCCP connecting the raw water pump station to North Lake is unknown. It has not been in service for over a decade. It was used several years ago to drain the lake back to the river as part of the lake lowering and new spillway project. The planned flow rate the pipe would see in the planned temporary pumping arrangement would be very low relative to its “normal” capacity, resulting in very little friction head. For practical design purposes, the friction head would be negligible (less than 1.0-psi) and pipe would see only the 67-ft (30-psi) of pressure. The pipe’s structural condition, given that it is over 60 years old and located in a high voltage power corridor without dedicated corrosion control devices or design features, is of greater concern than internal pressure. The cost to reliably assess the condition of the pipe in the ground is prohibitive (likely greater than $300,000). The internal, hydraulic condition of the pipe may also be questionable. It is probable that sags and vertical bends in the pipe (especially at Grapevine creek) have accumulated substantial amounts of sediment and river muck. We have experience with low, raw water intakes in Texas and have seen a biological slime layer on the inside of concrete pies as much as 2-inches thick. While this would normally reduce the hydraulic capacity of the pipelines, this is not a concern in this application from a hydraulic capacity perspective. It is a concern from a structural integrity point of view. The attached biological slime layers are highly acidic and are known to aggressively consume the cementitious core of PCCP, reducing the sectional modulus considerably. This can serve to exacerbate a weakened pipe structure that may be compromised by galvanic corrosion of the pre-stressing wires. 13. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Planning level Engineer’s Opinions of Probable Construction Cost (OPCC) for both short and long term improvements are included in Appendices 5 and 6. These OPCC’s reflect current construction pricing in the North Texas municipal market with planning level contingencies added as recommended by AACEI Best Practices. The short term OPCC’s also include conceptual cost models for on-call pump contracting based on advice from the three major service providers in our region. A budget for on-call pumping services is presented in Appendix 7. 24 14. Appendices 1. Exhibits 2. SHERMCO Report 3. 42-inch Pipeline Plans 4. GHA Laying Plans 5. OPCC Short-Term 6. OPCC Long-Term 7. OPCC On-Call Pumping Services 25 Appendix 1: Exhibits North Lake Dallas Elm Fork WTPExisting North LakePump Station Lewisville Lake Grapevine Lake Plano Denton Frisco Dallas Lewisville Carrollton McKinney Flower Mound Allen Prosper Grapevine Keller Southlake Richardson Little Elm Fort Worth Northlake Coppell Argyle Irving The Colony Corinth Garland Westlake Farmers Branch Roanoke Bartonville Oak Point Cross Roads Addison Dallas Highland Village Ponder Trophy Club Double Oak Hickory Creek Copper Canyon Shady Shores Justin Lake Dallas Hebron Colleyville DISH DISH Providence Village Krum Lakewood Village Hackberry Corral City Lincoln Park Krum Fairview Legend Roads Water Features City Boundaries ¹12,000 0 12,0006,000 Feet EX #1 - Project Region Map North Lake Raw Water System EvaluationCity of Coppell Sources:1. City Limits and Steets Data; 2016; City of Dallas GIS;http://gis.dallascityhall.com/homepage/shapezip.htm2. Texas NHD River, Streams and Waterbodies; 2009-2014;TNRIS; https://tnris.org/data-catalog/entry/texas-nhd-river-streams-and-waterbodies/ January 2018February North Lake Dallas Elm Fork WTP Existing North Lake Pump Station ElmForkT r i n it y Ri v e r G r a p e v i n e C r e e k Existing Outfall Structure Carrollton Coppell Irving Dallas Farmers Branch I 35EI635 LUNARDBELT LINE RD MACARTHURBLVDSANDY LAKE RD DENTONTAPRDLegend Current Lake Level 42" Water Line Roads Water Features Sources: 1. City Limits and Steets Data; 2016; City of Dallas GIS; http://gis.dallascityhall.com/homepage/shapezip.htm 2. North Lake Steam Electric Station; Nov 1956; DP&L; Sheets G-147461 and G-147465 3. 42" Pipeline to Elm Fork Lay Drawings; Gifford-Hill_American, Inc.; Sheets 116-1543-1A through 116-1543-9 ¹2,000 0 2,0001,000 Feet EX #2 - Project Area Map North Lake Raw Water System Evaluation City of Coppell January 2018 ^ February 33'28.0' 14.0'2'8'2.5'30'28.0' 34'12'15'81.3° PLAN1 SCALE: 1" = 20' North Lake Pump Station AA BB 20.5' BFV Pump Stop Log Bar Screen City of Dallas Carrollton Farmers Branch ISD Elm Fork of the Trinity River City of Dallas Approximate Property Line EX 3 30'16'11'8'2'6'6'2' EL. 426' EL. 442' EL. 450' 22' 10' LOW WATER LEVEL EL. 433.47' SECTION A-A2 EX 3 SCALE: 1" = 20' North Lake Pump Station FLOODPLAIN EL. = 444' ELEVATION B-B3 EX 3 SCALE: 1" = 20' North Lake Pump Station 33'9'2'16'28' EL. 442' EL. 426' TOP OF BANK' DECK EL. 450' 3 1 North Lake Raw Water System Evaluation City of Coppell EX #3 Pump Station Plan and Section A-A The information shown on this drawing is replicated from available record information and recent aerial; it is intended to indicate the configuration of the pump station and is not guaranteed to be accurate nor all inclusive. Sources: 1.North Lake Steam Electric Station; Nov 1956; DP&L; Sheets G-147461 and G-147465 2.Aerial; Oct 2017; Nearmap 3.Property Owner Information; Retrieved on Dec 2017; Dallas Central Appraisal District Scale: As Shown January 2018 NFebruary EXHIBIT E1138 kV TRANSMISSION TOWER375O kVA TRANSFORMER138 kV TO 4160VEXISTING 4160 VOLT SWITCHGEAREXISTING PUMP MOTORS, 450 HP,900 HP AND 1000 HPMANUAL BAR SCREEN WITHWETWELL BEHIND AND UNDERPUMPSMISC. PANELBOARDS ANDCONTROLS138 kV DISCONNECT SWITCHTOWER WITH THREE 4160 V TO120/240 V TRANSFORMERSEX #4February The information shown on this drawing is replicated from available record information; it is intended to indicate the approximate alignment of the existing 42" waterline and is not guaranteed to be accurate nor all inclusive. Sources: 1.North Lake Steam Electric Station; Nov 1956; DP&L; Sheets G-147461 and G-147465 2.42" Pipeline to Elm Fork Lay Drawings; Gifford-Hill-American, Inc.; Sheets 116-1543-1A through 116-1543-9 3.Aerial; Oct 2017; Nearmap North Lake Raw Water System Evaluation City of Coppell EX #5 - Pipeline Alignment N January 2018 Feet 16008000 February PLAN1 EX 6 SCALE: 1" = 20' North Lake Outfall Structure 12'18.5'Outfall Weir Wall Lake Level Gauge Access Platform Stilling Well for Level Gauge with Instrumentation Submerged Flume Outlet (42") Sidewalk from Dam Crest 4" STL Pipe AA 42" Water Line 500 501 50550 2 50 3 504SECTION A-A2 EX 6 SCALE: 1" = 20' North Lake Outfall Structure 10.0' 18.5' 12" Gate Valve (2)10.0'Weir E.L.=510 +/-E.L.=516 +/- 42" Water Line North Lake Raw Water System Evaluation City of Coppell EX #6 Outfall Structure Plan and Section A-A The information shown on this drawing is replicated from available record information and recent aerial; it is intended to indicate the configuration of the pump station and is not guaranteed to be accurate nor all inclusive. Sources: 1.North Lake Steam Electric Station; Nov 1956; DP&L; Sheets G-147461 and G-147465 2.Aerial; Oct 2017; Nearmap 3.Ground Elevation; Retrieved on Jan. 2018; NCTCOG Scale: As Shown January 2018 N February February North Lake Existing North LakePump Station El m ForkTrinity RiverG r a p e v i n e Creek Coppell Carrollton Irving Dallas Dallas 14 8 4 7 1 16 4 2 15 13 6 3 6 14 12 1212 4 6 5 5 9 5 5 6 5 17 5 5 6 10 11 12 13 10 10 19 15 18 BELT LINE RD SANDY LAKE RD Legend North Lake Limits Ex. 42" Waterline Roads Property Owners 1. Carrollton Farmers Branch ISD 2. Signature Living at Denton Creek 3. Denton Creek Nursing Home 4. Christus Health 5. Texas Utilities Elec. Co 6. Riverchase Owners Assn Inc 7. Houtex USA Inc 8. Riverchase Golf LLC 9. Life Storage LP 10. Coppell Corner LP 11. Billinglsey Cornell CPTL 12. Crow Billingsley Beltline 13. Henry Land LTD 14. Oncor Electric Delivery Co 15. City of Coppell 16. Town Center of Austin Ranch No. 1 Inc 17. Bellmont Landing of Coppell HOA Inc 18. Dustin and Nawal Degroff 19. Don Patrick and Karen McDonald Notes:1. City of Dallas limits follow Grapevine Creek with City of Coppell on north bank and City of Irving on the south bank. Sources:1. Parcels and Steets Data; 2016; City of Dallas GIS;http://gis.dallascityhall.com/homepage/shapezip.htm2. Property Owner Information; Retrieved on December 2017;Dallas Central Appraisal District 15 1 ¹1,000 0 1,000500 Feet EX #8 - Property Owners North Lake Raw Water System EvaluationCity of Coppell January 2018February 33'28.0' 14.0'2'8'30'28.0' 34'12'15'81.3° PLAN1 SCALE: 1" = 20' North Lake Pump Station AA B 20.5' BFV Pump Stop Log Bar Screen City of Dallas Carrollton Farmers Branch ISD Elm Fork of the Trinity River City of Dallas Approximate Property Line EX 3 B 2.5'10% Slope30'16'11'8'2'6'6'2' EL. 426' EL. 442' EL. 450' 22' 10' LOW WATER LEVEL EL. 433.47' SECTION A-A2 EX 3 SCALE: 1" = 20' North Lake Pump Station FLOODPLAIN EL. = 444' ELEVATION B-B3 EX 3 SCALE: 1" = 20' North Lake Pump Station 33'9'2'16'28' EL. 442' EL. 426' TOP OF BANK' DECK EL. 450' 3 1 North Lake Raw Water System Evaluation City of Coppell EX #9 Temporary Pumping Option The information shown on this drawing is replicated from available record information and recent aerial; it is intended to indicate the configuration of the pump station and is not guaranteed to be accurate nor all inclusive. Sources: 1.North Lake Steam Electric Station; Nov 1956; DP&L; Sheets G-147461 and G-147465 2.Aerial; Oct 2017; Nearmap 3.Property Owner Information; Retrieved on Dec 2017; Dallas Central Appraisal District Scale: As Shown January 2018 N10-12" VERTICAL TAPPING VALVE TO EX. 42" WATER LINE TEMPORARY PUMP ACCESS RAMP TO INTAKE CHANNEL TO BE DE-SILTED BY OTHERS February 35 Appendix 2: SHERMCO Report Customer: FSG Electric Location: North Lake Pump Station Coppell, Texas Shermco Project No.: 82000030 Description: Evaluate Switchgear Date: April 17, 2015 Work Performed and Report Prepared By: Shermco Industries Corporate Headquarters | Dallas Service Center 2425 E. Pioneer Dr., Irving, TX 75061 shermco.com shermco.com Dallas Service Center 2425 East Pioneer Drive, Irving, TX 75061 p. 972.793.5523 f. 972.793.5542 June 11, 2015 Mr. Jerry Bevers FSG Electric 2525 Walnut Hill Lane, Suite 100 Dallas, TX 75229 Subject: Evaluate Switchgear Shermco Project No. 82000030 Location: North Lake Pump Station Coppell, Texas Dear Mr. Bevers: On April 17, 2015, Shermco Industries performed an evaluation of the switchgear and transformers for FSG Electric at the North Lake Pump Station located in Coppell, Texas. The following is the overall condition of the switchgear as found: Transformer Issues: Overall power factor test was unsatisfactory. The winding to ground insulation has exceeded three times the maximum good rating limit. This condition may be related to the moisture in the winding insulation, contamination and/or deterioration of the bushing insulation and excessive surface leakage over the porcelain. H1-bushing does not show any oil for the C2 tap and there was arcing when we tried to test it. The H2- bushing has a broken skirt and tested very high on power factor. The H3-bushing shows to be out or very low on oil. Shermco was unable to remove the cap for the C2 tap due to it being damaged from arcing of some sort. The X3-lightning arrester is broken. Winding resistance is very high on high side winding. There are leaks on some of the bushings and radiators. Shermco recommends replacing the transformer and low side arresters due to age and condition. Circuit Breaker Issues: All three breaker cells are missing various cell side racking mechanism parts for racking motor. Shermco recommends replacing with vacuum retrofit breakers or have breakers remanufactured. Pump #1 breaker is the only breaker that would close from the control switch. There seemed to be a standing trip on all of the breakers which we could not locate. The closing plunger on Pump #2 sticks in the closed position and does not fall back into place which holds the breaker in the closed position. The cell side bushing bottles on Pump #3 are leaking and recommend having them replaced. Also, the breaker after being closed and with the 48Vdc applied, would not trip immediately. The breaker would trip on its own after a minute or so. We were able to trip this breaker from the relays, operating them by hand due to the standing trip not affecting the breaker immediately. All of the grease has hardened in the breaker mechanisms and the pivot points on the moving contacts of the breakers. The breakers would not operate without applying spray lubrication, which is only a Page 2 temporary solution. A manual closing device was not available on site, so were unable to slow close the breakers. When opening or closing the breakers, the operation was very sluggish. Switchgear Issues: Overall condition is very poor. Further investigation and troubleshooting would be necessary. The control wiring has random jumpers, cut wires and some of the wiring has insulation coming off. There are many areas where we had to remove the wire and clean the connections to allow voltage to pass through. There are defective wiring connections throughout the switchgear. There are signs of tracking in the switchgear and also areas that looked like it may have been wet at some point in time. The motor leads on Pump #2 and Pump #3 have the outer jacket over the insulation splitting in areas. Much of the gasket material has fallen off of the doors and deteriorated around the covers. This would also need to be replaced to help keep water and dirt out of the gear. Relays: None of the relays would operate properly. The (27) UV relay coil was burnt and does not operate at all. Recommend to replace all relays and meters. CPT’s: The CPT’s ratios were acceptable but the insulation resistance is low and does not pass NETA specifications. Recommend replacement. Metering PT’s: The metering PT’s passed testing but had water in the secondary wiring connection compartment and the connections were corroded. Recommend to replace or repair. Metering CT’s, Incoming PT’s and CT’s: Passed all testing. Batteries: No testing performed. Recommend to replace battery system. Motors: Pump #1 insulation resistance test set would not reach test voltage (2500Vdc). It was only reaching 1050Vdc and the insulation resistance was 0.5 Megohms. We were able to verify that some of the heaters worked when we turned the heaters on. Pump #2 insulation resistance test set reached the test voltage and the reading was 30 Megohms. The heaters do not appear to be wired nor could we verify that any heaters were working. Pump 3 insulation resistance test set reached the voltage and the reading was 4.5 Megohms. This needs to be a minimum of 1000 Megohms per NETA specifications. We were able to verify that some of the heaters worked when we turned the heaters on. Data sheets, oil sample test results and technical information are enclosed for your review. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or require additional information or services, please do not hesitate to contact us. We are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Respectfully submitted, Shermco Industries Dallas Service Center Butch Stark Field Service Technician Engineering Services Division Comment & Deficiency Summaries 1PAGE Customer FSG Electric User North Lake Pump Station Plant Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com Deficiency Summary Job #82000030 3 4/17/2015 11:46:47 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Pump 1 Equipment:15015 - MVCB_R1 (Shermco) DEFICIENCIES:1. Mechanism does not have any lubrication. What lubrication was there had dried and is no longer good. The mech was sprayed with lube so it would operate. 2. The manual closing jack assembly is not on site. Unable to perform slow closing of breaker. 3. The racking mechanism is missing parts and also the racking motor is missing. 4. Unable to verify any control wiring due to bad connections, relays not working properly and possible interlocks not found on drawing. Heater wiring is bad also. 5. Contact resistance and Insulation resistance is out of NETA Specifications. 5 4/17/2015 11:45:23 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Pump 2 Equipment:15015 - MVCB_R1 (Shermco) DEFICIENCIES:1. Mechanism does not have any lubrication. What lubrication was there had dried and is no longer good. The mech was sprayed with lube so it would operate. 2. The manual closing jack assembly is not on site. Unable to perform slow closing of breaker. 3. The racking mechanism is missing parts and also the racking motor is missing. 4. Unable to verify any control wiring due to bad connections, relays not working properly and possible interlocks not found on drawing. Heater wiring is bad also. 5. Insulation resistance doe not pass NETA specifications on Line to Load testing. 7 4/17/2015 11:48:10 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Pump 3 Equipment:15015 - MVCB_R1 (Shermco) DEFICIENCIES:1. Mechanism does not have any lubrication. What lubrication was there had dried and is no longer good. The mech was sprayed with lube so it would operate. 2. The manual closing jack assembly is not on site. Unable to perform slow closing of breaker. 3. The racking mechanism is missing parts and also the racking motor is missing. 4. Unable to verify any control wiring due to bad connections, relays not working properly and possible interlocks not found on drawing. Heater wiring is bad also. 5. Cell side bottles leaking. Recommend to replace. 6. Contact resistance is higher than expected for amperage of breaker. Insulation resistance is out of NETA specifications. 9 4/17/2015 9:11:20 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Main Transformer Equipment:45001 - OVERCURRENT RELAY (Shermco) (2) DEFICIENCIES:1D. RELAY WILL NOT PRODUCE CONSISTANT RESULTS DUE TO CORROSION. RELAY RED TAGGED AND RECOMMEND REPLACING. 10 4/17/2015 9:12:27 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Main Transformer Equipment:45001 - OVERCURRENT RELAY (Shermco) (2) (2) DEFICIENCIES:1D. RELAY WILL NOT PRODUCE CONSISTANT RESULTS DUE TO CORROSION. RELAY RED TAGGED AND RECOMMEND REPLACING. Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com Deficiency Summary Job #82000030 2PAGE TESTED BY: www.shermco.comCopyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: 11 4/15/2015 11:55:32 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Pump 1 Equipment:45001 - OVERCURRENT RELAY (Shermco) (2) DEFICIENCIES:1D. RELAY WILL NOT PRODUCE CONSISTANT RESULTS DUE TO CORROSION. RELAY RED TAGGED AND RECOMMEND REPLACING. 12 4/15/2015 11:56:23 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Pump 2 Equipment:45001 - OVERCURRENT RELAY (Shermco) (2) DEFICIENCIES:1D. RELAY WILL NOT PRODUCE CONSISTANT RESULTS DUE TO CORROSION. RELAY RED TAGGED AND RECOMMEND REPLACING. 13 4/15/2015 11:56:44 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Pump 3 Equipment:45001 - OVERCURRENT RELAY (Shermco) DEFICIENCIES:1D. RELAY WILL NOT PRODUCE CONSISTANT RESULTS DUE TO CORROSION. RELAY RED TAGGED AND RECOMMEND REPLACING. 14 3/19/2015 12:41:09 PMDate: Page:Substation:Main Incoming CircuitID:Undervoltage Relay Equipment:46500 - PROTECTIVE RELAY (Shermco) DEFICIENCIES:1D. RELAY NOT TESTED DUE TO BURNT WIRE GOING TO SOLENOID FAILING AND DAMGING THE RELAY. RELAY HAS BEEN EXPOSED TO EXTREME MOISTURE AND WILL NOT SLIDE OUT OF THE CASE. RELAY RED TAGGED AND RECOMMEND REPLACING. 15 4/17/2015 11:56:29 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Switchgear Equipment:50950 - Distribution Switchgear (SI) DEFICIENCIES:1. Gasket material has degraded and does not keep water and dirt from getting into switchgear. 2. Kirk Lock for PT drawer had to be destroyed to be able to get into PT drawer. 16 5/7/2015 12:34:48 PMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Main Transformer Equipment:56027 - TRANSFORMER - M4000 (Shermco) Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com Deficiency Summary Job #82000030 3PAGE TESTED BY: www.shermco.comCopyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: DEFICIENCIES:1. Winding resistance on High side is higher than normal. 2. Bushings tested do not meet NETA specifications. 3. The winding to ground insulation has exceeded three times the maximum Good Rating limit. This could be 1. Contamination and/or deterioration of the bushing insulation. 2. Excessive surface leakage over the porcelain. Due to the age and the unknown issues Shermco recommends to replace the transformer. 18 4/17/2015 11:54:24 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CPT's CircuitID:Center CPT Equipment:56040 - TRANSFORMER DATA SHEET (Si) DEFICIENCIES:1. Low side cables insulation is coming off. 2. Insulation resistance does not meet NETA specifications. 19 4/17/2015 11:54:43 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CPT's CircuitID:East CPT Equipment:56040 - TRANSFORMER DATA SHEET (Si) DEFICIENCIES:1. Low side cables insulation is coming off. 2. X1 bushing was found loose. 3. Insulation resistance does not meet NETA specifications. 20 4/17/2015 11:55:04 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CPT's CircuitID:West CPT Equipment:56040 - TRANSFORMER DATA SHEET (Si) DEFICIENCIES:1. Low side cables insulation is coming off. 2. Insulation resistance does not meet NETA specifications. 22 4/17/2015 11:55:43 AMDate: Page:Substation:Metering PT's CircuitID:Metering PT's Equipment:56225 - INSTRUMENT TRANSFORMER (Si) DEFICIENCIES:1. Secondary wiring is very corroded. Wiring compartment is wet. 1PAGE Customer FSG Electric User North Lake Pump Station Plant Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com Comment Summary Job #82000030 1 4/15/2015Date: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Incoming CT's Equipment:00200 - Comments (Shermco) COMMENTS:1. Model number may not be accurate due to name plate age and unable to make out all letters or numbers. 3 4/17/2015 11:46:47 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Pump 1 Equipment:15015 - MVCB_R1 (Shermco) COMMENTS:1. Counter does not operate. 5 4/17/2015 11:45:23 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Pump 2 Equipment:15015 - MVCB_R1 (Shermco) COMMENTS:1. Counter does not operate. 7 4/17/2015 11:48:10 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Pump 3 Equipment:15015 - MVCB_R1 (Shermco) COMMENTS:1. Counter does not operate properly. 15 4/17/2015 11:56:29 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Switchgear Equipment:50950 - Distribution Switchgear (SI) COMMENTS:1. Unable to verify control wiring due to added jumpers, cut wires and bad connections due to corrosion. 16 5/7/2015 12:34:48 PMDate: Page:Substation:Main CircuitID:Main Transformer Equipment:56027 - TRANSFORMER - M4000 (Shermco) Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com Comment Summary Job #82000030 2PAGE TESTED BY: www.shermco.comCopyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: COMMENTS:1. Low side arresters not tested. X3 arrester is broken. 18 4/17/2015 11:54:24 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CPT's CircuitID:Center CPT Equipment:56040 - TRANSFORMER DATA SHEET (Si) COMMENTS:1. Cable from switchgear and all three transformers included on insulation resistance test H-L+G. 2. Fuse Info:GE, Type:EJ-1, CAT#6193404, Nom Volts: 4800, Amp:1.0E, Size C, INST:GE-10951, Max DES Volts:5500 3. Fuse Resistance 1.1, 19 4/17/2015 11:54:43 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CPT's CircuitID:East CPT Equipment:56040 - TRANSFORMER DATA SHEET (Si) COMMENTS:1. Cable from switchgear and all three transformers included on insulation resistance test H-L+G. 20 4/17/2015 11:55:04 AMDate: Page:Substation:Main CPT's CircuitID:West CPT Equipment:56040 - TRANSFORMER DATA SHEET (Si) COMMENTS:1. Cable from switchgear and all three transformers included on insulation resistance test H-L+G. 22 4/17/2015 11:55:43 AMDate: Page:Substation:Metering PT's CircuitID:Metering PT's Equipment:56225 - INSTRUMENT TRANSFORMER (Si) COMMENTS:1. Fuse Holder S&C SMU-20 Table of Contents Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com Table of Contents Job #82000030 www.shermco.com Last Revision Date 5/28/2010Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. 1PAGE Substation CircuitID Asset PAGE NO. Plant User North Lake Pump Station FSG ElectricCustomer 00200 - Comments (Shermco)1Incoming CT'sMain 00200 - Comments (Shermco)2Metering CT'sMain 15015 - MVCB_R1 (Shermco)3Pump 1Main 15015 - MVCB_R1 (Shermco)5Pump 2Main 15015 - MVCB_R1 (Shermco)7Pump 3Main 45001 - OVERCURRENT RELAY (Shermco) (2)9Main TransformerMain 45001 - OVERCURRENT RELAY (Shermco) (2) (2)10Main TransformerMain 45001 - OVERCURRENT RELAY (Shermco) (2)11Pump 1Main 45001 - OVERCURRENT RELAY (Shermco) (2)12Pump 2Main 45001 - OVERCURRENT RELAY (Shermco)13Pump 3Main 46500 - PROTECTIVE RELAY (Shermco)14Undervoltage RelayMain Incoming 50950 - Distribution Switchgear (SI)15SwitchgearMain 56027 - TRANSFORMER - M4000 (Shermco)16Main TransformerMain 56040 - TRANSFORMER DATA SHEET (Si)18Center CPTMain CPT's 56040 - TRANSFORMER DATA SHEET (Si)19East CPTMain CPT's 56040 - TRANSFORMER DATA SHEET (Si)20West CPTMain CPT's 56225 - INSTRUMENT TRANSFORMER (Si)21Incoming PT'sMain 56225 - INSTRUMENT TRANSFORMER (Si)22Metering PT'sMetering PT's Test Data DATE SUBSTATION Main Incoming CT'sCIRCUIT ID 4/15/2015 TEMPERATURE 75 °F HUMIDITY 50 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com Current Transformer Data USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 1 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 14-011 BStark / WCauthenTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.00200, Last Revision Date 8/19/2014Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: COMMENTS Mfg: GE, Ratio:400:5, Cat #639X7, Model #91CS09AAZH. (See Note 1.) COMMENTS:1. Model number may not be accurate due to name plate age and unable to make out all letters or numbers. DEFICIENCIES: FILENAME: RunTest.test DATE: 04/16/15 08:57:42 COMPANY: FSG STATION: North Lake PS CIRCUIT: Incoming MFR: GE MODEL: SN: OPERATOR: BStark COMMENTS: TEST # 1: X1-X2 TEST NOTES: KNEE TYPE: IEEE 30 Deg FREQUENCY: 60 Hz IEEE 30 IEEE 45 IEC 10/50 Vkp[Volts]: 82.92 Ikp[Amps]: 0.2088 Vkp[Volts]: 65.04 Ikp[Amps]: 0.1572 Vkp[Volts]: 87.52 Ikp[Amps]: 0.2390 NP-RATIO: 400/5.0 M-RATIO: 80.053 % ERROR: 0.0665 Ex V[Volts]: 55.100 Ex I[Amps]: 0.138 Phase Angle:-0.04° In Phase CT DATA POINTS POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 1 0.0000 0.00 2 0.0000 0.00 3 0.0000 0.00 4 0.0000 0.00 5 0.0000 0.00 6 0.0000 0.00 7 0.0000 0.00 8 0.0000 0.00 9 0.0000 0.00 10 0.0130 1.60 123.08 11 0.0140 1.84 131.43 12 0.0166 2.52 151.81 13 0.0206 3.36 163.11 14 0.0258 4.80 186.05 15 0.0310 6.40 206.45 16 0.0390 9.24 236.92 POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 17 0.0482 12.76 264.73 18 0.0576 16.52 286.81 19 0.0698 21.80 312.32 20 0.0860 29.52 343.26 21 0.1062 39.84 375.14 22 0.1298 51.88 399.69 23 0.1590 65.92 414.59 24 0.2002 79.96 399.40 25 0.2458 88.84 361.43 26 0.2974 93.48 314.32 27 0.3592 96.48 268.60 28 0.4468 98.80 221.13 29 0.5546 100.60 181.39 30 0.6792 101.96 150.12 31 0.8370 103.16 123.25 32 1.0220 104.12 101.88 GRAPH POINTS POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 1 0.0010 0.10 100.00 2 0.0020 0.20 100.00 3 0.0040 0.50 125.00 4 0.0050 0.60 120.00 5 0.0080 1.00 125.00 6 0.0100 1.20 120.00 7 0.0200 3.20 160.00 8 0.0400 9.60 240.00 9 0.0500 13.50 270.00 10 0.0800 26.70 333.75 11 0.1000 36.70 367.00 POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 12 0.2000 79.90 399.50 13 0.4000 97.60 244.00 14 0.5000 99.70 199.40 15 0.8000 102.90 128.63 16 1.0000 104.00 104.00 CT Excitation Plot 1 V 10 V 100 V1000 V10000 V2000 V .001 A .01 A 0.1 A 1.0 A 10 A EZCT-2000 Software Version: 1.35 www.vanguard-instruments.com FILENAME: RunTest.test DATE: 04/16/15 08:57:42 COMPANY: FSG STATION: North Lake PS CIRCUIT: Incoming MFR: GE MODEL: SN: OPERATOR: BStark COMMENTS: SUMMARY REPORT KNEE TYPE: IEEE 30 Deg FREQUENCY: 60 Hz Test Tap IEEE30 IEEE45 IEC 10/50 NP-Ratio M-Ratio % Error Phase Angle Winding Res 1 X1-X2 82.92 65.04 87.52 400/5.0 80.053 0.0665 % -0.04° N/A CT Excitation Plot 1 V 10 V 100 V1000 V10000 V2000 V .001 A .01 A 0.1 A 1.0 A 10 A Test Notepad EZCT-2000 Software Version: 1.35 www.vanguard-instruments.com FILENAME: RunTest.test DATE: 04/16/15 09:01:53 COMPANY: FSG STATION: North Lake PS CIRCUIT: Incoming MFR: GE MODEL: SN: OPERATOR: BStark COMMENTS: TEST # 1: X1-X2 TEST NOTES: KNEE TYPE: IEEE 30 Deg FREQUENCY: 60 Hz IEEE 30 IEEE 45 IEC 10/50 Vkp[Volts]: 81.24 Ikp[Amps]: 0.1828 Vkp[Volts]: 68.24 Ikp[Amps]: 0.1452 Vkp[Volts]: 87.24 Ikp[Amps]: 0.2072 NP-RATIO: 400/5.0 M-RATIO: 80.032 % ERROR: 0.0395 Ex V[Volts]: 54.900 Ex I[Amps]: 0.121 Phase Angle:-0.02° In Phase CT DATA POINTS POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 1 0.0000 0.00 2 0.0000 0.00 3 0.0000 0.00 4 0.0000 0.00 5 0.0000 0.00 6 0.0000 0.00 7 0.0000 0.00 8 0.0000 0.00 9 0.0108 1.64 151.85 10 0.0118 1.96 166.10 11 0.0144 2.72 188.89 12 0.0168 3.36 200.00 13 0.0210 4.80 228.57 14 0.0250 6.28 251.20 15 0.0306 8.36 273.20 16 0.0384 11.52 300.00 POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 17 0.0462 15.12 327.27 18 0.0568 20.28 357.04 19 0.0698 27.00 386.82 20 0.0866 36.36 419.86 21 0.1052 47.08 447.53 22 0.1298 60.88 469.03 23 0.1600 75.20 470.00 24 0.2038 86.80 425.91 25 0.2426 91.84 378.57 26 0.2966 95.24 321.11 27 0.3656 97.56 266.85 28 0.4476 99.36 221.98 29 0.5578 100.84 180.78 30 0.7004 102.20 145.92 31 0.8518 103.16 121.11 32 1.0488 104.28 99.43 GRAPH POINTS POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 1 0.0010 0.20 200.00 2 0.0020 0.30 150.00 3 0.0040 0.60 150.00 4 0.0050 0.80 160.00 5 0.0080 1.20 150.00 6 0.0100 1.50 150.00 7 0.0200 4.40 220.00 8 0.0400 12.20 305.00 9 0.0500 17.00 340.00 10 0.0800 32.70 408.75 11 0.1000 44.10 441.00 POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 12 0.2000 85.80 429.00 13 0.4000 98.30 245.75 14 0.5000 100.10 200.20 15 0.8000 102.80 128.50 16 1.0000 104.00 104.00 CT Excitation Plot 1 V 10 V 100 V1000 V10000 V2000 V .001 A .01 A 0.1 A 1.0 A 10 A EZCT-2000 Software Version: 1.35 www.vanguard-instruments.com FILENAME: RunTest.test DATE: 04/16/15 09:01:53 COMPANY: FSG STATION: North Lake PS CIRCUIT: Incoming MFR: GE MODEL: SN: OPERATOR: BStark COMMENTS: SUMMARY REPORT KNEE TYPE: IEEE 30 Deg FREQUENCY: 60 Hz Test Tap IEEE30 IEEE45 IEC 10/50 NP-Ratio M-Ratio % Error Phase Angle Winding Res 1 X1-X2 81.24 68.24 87.24 400/5.0 80.032 0.0395 % -0.02° N/A CT Excitation Plot 1 V 10 V 100 V1000 V10000 V2000 V .001 A .01 A 0.1 A 1.0 A 10 A Test Notepad EZCT-2000 Software Version: 1.35 www.vanguard-instruments.com FILENAME: RunTest.test DATE: 04/16/15 09:04:57 COMPANY: FSG STATION: North Lake PS CIRCUIT: Incoming MFR: GE MODEL: SN: OPERATOR: BStark COMMENTS: TEST # 1: X1-X2 TEST NOTES: KNEE TYPE: IEEE 30 Deg FREQUENCY: 60 Hz IEEE 30 IEEE 45 IEC 10/50 Vkp[Volts]: 78.20 Ikp[Amps]: 0.2132 Vkp[Volts]: 58.36 Ikp[Amps]: 0.1508 Vkp[Volts]: 84.72 Ikp[Amps]: 0.2638 NP-RATIO: 400/5.0 M-RATIO: 80.049 % ERROR: 0.0607 Ex V[Volts]: 54.000 Ex I[Amps]: 0.141 Phase Angle:-0.04° In Phase CT DATA POINTS POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 1 0.0000 0.00 2 0.0000 0.00 3 0.0000 0.00 4 0.0000 0.00 5 0.0000 0.00 6 0.0000 0.00 7 0.0000 0.00 8 0.0000 0.00 9 0.0106 1.64 154.72 10 0.0118 1.96 166.10 11 0.0148 2.76 186.49 12 0.0170 3.28 192.94 13 0.0224 4.88 217.86 14 0.0266 6.24 234.59 15 0.0322 8.12 252.17 16 0.0378 9.96 263.49 POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 17 0.0472 13.56 287.29 18 0.0570 17.48 306.67 19 0.0710 23.32 328.45 20 0.0862 30.00 348.03 21 0.1056 38.68 366.29 22 0.1292 49.32 381.73 23 0.1584 61.60 388.89 24 0.2006 74.36 370.69 25 0.2430 82.44 339.26 26 0.2958 88.28 298.44 27 0.3664 92.52 252.51 28 0.4424 95.24 215.28 29 0.5478 97.56 178.09 30 0.6796 99.64 146.62 31 0.8270 101.28 122.47 32 1.0264 102.48 99.84 GRAPH POINTS POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 1 0.0010 0.20 200.00 2 0.0020 0.30 150.00 3 0.0040 0.60 150.00 4 0.0050 0.80 160.00 5 0.0080 1.20 150.00 6 0.0100 1.60 160.00 7 0.0200 4.20 210.00 8 0.0400 10.80 270.00 9 0.0500 14.70 294.00 10 0.0800 27.30 341.25 11 0.1000 36.20 362.00 POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 12 0.2000 74.20 371.00 13 0.4000 93.70 234.25 14 0.5000 96.50 193.00 15 0.8000 101.00 126.25 16 1.0000 102.30 102.30 CT Excitation Plot 1 V 10 V 100 V1000 V10000 V2000 V .001 A .01 A 0.1 A 1.0 A 10 A EZCT-2000 Software Version: 1.35 www.vanguard-instruments.com FILENAME: RunTest.test DATE: 04/16/15 09:04:57 COMPANY: FSG STATION: North Lake PS CIRCUIT: Incoming MFR: GE MODEL: SN: OPERATOR: BStark COMMENTS: SUMMARY REPORT KNEE TYPE: IEEE 30 Deg FREQUENCY: 60 Hz Test Tap IEEE30 IEEE45 IEC 10/50 NP-Ratio M-Ratio % Error Phase Angle Winding Res 1 X1-X2 78.20 58.36 84.72 400/5.0 80.049 0.0607 % -0.04° N/A CT Excitation Plot 1 V 10 V 100 V1000 V10000 V2000 V .001 A .01 A 0.1 A 1.0 A 10 A Test Notepad EZCT-2000 Software Version: 1.35 www.vanguard-instruments.com DATE SUBSTATION Main Metering CT'sCIRCUIT ID 4/15/2015 TEMPERATURE 75 °F HUMIDITY 50 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com Current Transformer Data USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 2 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 14-011 BStark / WCauthenTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.00200, Last Revision Date 8/19/2014Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: COMMENTS Mfg: ABB, Ratio:150:5, Rating Factor: 3.0, S#7524A25G10 COMMENTS: DEFICIENCIES: FILENAME: RunTest.test DATE: 04/15/15 14:06:47 COMPANY: FSG STATION: North Lake Pump Stat CIRCUIT: X1 MFR: ABB MODEL: SN: 40143568 OPERATOR: BStark COMMENTS: Metering CT TEST # 1: X1-X2 TEST NOTES: KNEE TYPE: IEEE 30 Deg FREQUENCY: 60 Hz IEEE 30 IEEE 45 IEC 10/50 Vkp[Volts]: 34.72 Ikp[Amps]: 0.0944 Vkp[Volts]: 26.76 Ikp[Amps]: 0.0708 Vkp[Volts]: 36.72 Ikp[Amps]: 0.1118 NP-RATIO: 150/5.0 M-RATIO: 29.949 % ERROR: 0.1690 Ex V[Volts]: 21.900 Ex I[Amps]: 0.060 Winding Res: 126.19 mill-ohms Phase Angle:0.04° In Phase CT DATA POINTS POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 1 0.0000 0.00 2 0.0000 0.00 3 0.0000 0.00 4 0.0000 0.00 5 0.0000 0.00 6 0.0000 0.00 7 0.0070 1.52 217.14 8 0.0078 1.68 215.38 9 0.0108 2.60 240.74 10 0.0134 3.28 244.78 11 0.0138 3.36 243.48 12 0.0178 4.76 267.42 13 0.0216 6.04 279.63 14 0.0270 8.00 296.30 15 0.0308 9.44 306.49 16 0.0408 13.56 332.35 POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 17 0.0470 16.40 348.94 18 0.0576 21.24 368.75 19 0.0708 26.76 377.97 20 0.0874 32.36 370.25 21 0.1070 36.24 338.69 22 0.1306 38.68 296.17 23 0.1622 40.48 249.57 24 0.2046 41.68 203.71 25 0.2410 42.60 176.76 26 0.3130 43.52 139.04 27 0.3860 44.20 114.51 28 0.4496 44.64 99.29 29 0.5570 45.24 81.22 30 0.6876 45.80 66.61 31 0.8394 46.32 55.18 32 1.0472 46.88 44.77 GRAPH POINTS POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 1 0.0010 0.20 200.00 2 0.0020 0.40 200.00 3 0.0040 0.90 225.00 4 0.0050 1.10 220.00 5 0.0080 1.80 225.00 6 0.0100 2.40 240.00 7 0.0200 5.50 275.00 8 0.0400 13.20 330.00 9 0.0500 17.80 356.00 10 0.0800 29.90 373.75 11 0.1000 34.80 348.00 POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 12 0.2000 41.60 208.00 13 0.4000 44.30 110.75 14 0.5000 44.90 89.80 15 0.8000 46.20 57.75 16 1.0000 46.80 46.80 CT Excitation Plot 1 V 10 V 100 V1000 V10000 V2000 V .001 A .01 A 0.1 A 1.0 A 10 A EZCT-2000 Software Version: 1.35 www.vanguard-instruments.com FILENAME: RunTest.test DATE: 04/15/15 14:06:47 COMPANY: FSG STATION: North Lake Pump Stat CIRCUIT: X1 MFR: ABB MODEL: SN: 40143568 OPERATOR: BStark COMMENTS: Metering CT SUMMARY REPORT KNEE TYPE: IEEE 30 Deg FREQUENCY: 60 Hz Test Tap IEEE30 IEEE45 IEC 10/50 NP-Ratio M-Ratio % Error Phase Angle Winding Res 1 X1-X2 34.72 26.76 36.72 150/5.0 29.949 0.1690 % 0.04° 126.19 m-ohms CT Excitation Plot 1 V 10 V 100 V1000 V10000 V2000 V .001 A .01 A 0.1 A 1.0 A 10 A Test Notepad EZCT-2000 Software Version: 1.35 www.vanguard-instruments.com FILENAME: RunTest.test DATE: 04/15/15 14:16:21 COMPANY: FSG STATION: North Lake Pump Stat CIRCUIT: X1 MFR: ABB MODEL: SN: 40143567 OPERATOR: BStark COMMENTS: Metering CT TEST # 1: X1-X2 TEST NOTES: KNEE TYPE: IEEE 30 Deg FREQUENCY: 60 Hz IEEE 30 IEEE 45 IEC 10/50 Vkp[Volts]: 33.24 Ikp[Amps]: 0.1118 Vkp[Volts]: 24.96 Ikp[Amps]: 0.0792 Vkp[Volts]: 37.12 Ikp[Amps]: 0.1470 NP-RATIO: 150/5.0 M-RATIO: 29.948 % ERROR: 0.1743 Ex V[Volts]: 22.100 Ex I[Amps]: 0.072 Winding Res: 89.83 mill-ohms Phase Angle:0.04° In Phase CT DATA POINTS POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 1 0.0000 0.00 2 0.0000 0.00 3 0.0000 0.00 4 0.0000 0.00 5 0.0000 0.00 6 0.0000 0.00 7 0.0000 0.00 8 0.0088 1.64 186.36 9 0.0090 1.72 191.11 10 0.0118 2.44 206.78 11 0.0146 3.16 216.44 12 0.0178 4.08 229.21 13 0.0204 4.76 233.33 14 0.0266 6.56 246.62 15 0.0308 8.00 259.74 16 0.0394 11.00 279.19 POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 17 0.0466 13.48 289.27 18 0.0574 17.40 303.14 19 0.0710 22.36 314.93 20 0.0864 27.28 315.74 21 0.1064 31.96 300.38 22 0.1292 35.48 274.61 23 0.1638 38.68 236.14 24 0.2022 40.60 200.79 25 0.2522 42.16 167.17 26 0.3110 43.32 139.29 27 0.3744 44.08 117.74 28 0.4444 44.64 100.45 29 0.5446 45.24 83.07 30 0.6764 45.84 67.77 31 0.8190 46.32 56.56 32 1.0428 46.96 45.03 GRAPH POINTS POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 1 0.0010 0.20 200.00 2 0.0020 0.40 200.00 3 0.0040 0.80 200.00 4 0.0050 0.90 180.00 5 0.0080 1.50 187.50 6 0.0100 2.00 200.00 7 0.0200 4.60 230.00 8 0.0400 11.20 280.00 9 0.0500 14.70 294.00 10 0.0800 25.20 315.00 11 0.1000 30.50 305.00 POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 12 0.2000 40.50 202.50 13 0.4000 44.30 110.75 14 0.5000 45.00 90.00 15 0.8000 46.20 57.75 16 1.0000 46.80 46.80 CT Excitation Plot 1 V 10 V 100 V1000 V10000 V2000 V .001 A .01 A 0.1 A 1.0 A 10 A EZCT-2000 Software Version: 1.35 www.vanguard-instruments.com FILENAME: RunTest.test DATE: 04/15/15 14:16:21 COMPANY: FSG STATION: North Lake Pump Stat CIRCUIT: X1 MFR: ABB MODEL: SN: 40143567 OPERATOR: BStark COMMENTS: Metering CT SUMMARY REPORT KNEE TYPE: IEEE 30 Deg FREQUENCY: 60 Hz Test Tap IEEE30 IEEE45 IEC 10/50 NP-Ratio M-Ratio % Error Phase Angle Winding Res 1 X1-X2 33.24 24.96 37.12 150/5.0 29.948 0.1743 % 0.04° 89.83 m-ohms CT Excitation Plot 1 V 10 V 100 V1000 V10000 V2000 V .001 A .01 A 0.1 A 1.0 A 10 A Test Notepad EZCT-2000 Software Version: 1.35 www.vanguard-instruments.com FILENAME: RunTest.test DATE: 04/15/15 14:23:53 COMPANY: FSG STATION: North Lake Pump Stat CIRCUIT: X3 MFR: ABB MODEL: SN: 401435 OPERATOR: BStark COMMENTS: Metering CT TEST # 1: X1-X2 TEST NOTES: KNEE TYPE: IEEE 30 Deg FREQUENCY: 60 Hz IEEE 30 IEEE 45 IEC 10/50 Vkp[Volts]: 32.88 Ikp[Amps]: 0.1122 Vkp[Volts]: 24.16 Ikp[Amps]: 0.0784 Vkp[Volts]: 37.32 Ikp[Amps]: 0.1528 NP-RATIO: 150/5.0 M-RATIO: 29.948 % ERROR: 0.1733 Ex V[Volts]: 21.700 Ex I[Amps]: 0.072 Winding Res: 87.98 mill-ohms Phase Angle:0.06° In Phase CT DATA POINTS POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 1 0.0000 0.00 2 0.0000 0.00 3 0.0000 0.00 4 0.0000 0.00 5 0.0000 0.00 6 0.0000 0.00 7 0.0000 0.00 8 0.0080 1.56 195.00 9 0.0098 1.96 200.00 10 0.0126 2.76 219.05 11 0.0150 3.32 221.33 12 0.0186 4.36 234.41 13 0.0208 4.88 234.62 14 0.0258 6.40 248.06 15 0.0320 8.28 258.75 16 0.0380 10.36 272.63 POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 17 0.0478 13.76 287.87 18 0.0572 17.04 297.90 19 0.0698 21.48 307.74 20 0.0860 26.52 308.37 21 0.1050 31.12 296.38 22 0.1306 35.16 269.22 23 0.1630 38.36 235.34 24 0.1942 40.00 205.97 25 0.2426 41.64 171.64 26 0.3022 42.84 141.76 27 0.3916 43.88 112.05 28 0.4528 44.44 98.14 29 0.5526 45.04 81.51 30 0.6660 45.64 68.53 31 0.8150 46.20 56.69 32 1.0312 46.80 45.38 GRAPH POINTS POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 1 0.0010 0.20 200.00 2 0.0020 0.40 200.00 3 0.0040 0.80 200.00 4 0.0050 1.00 200.00 5 0.0080 1.60 200.00 6 0.0100 2.00 200.00 7 0.0200 4.70 235.00 8 0.0400 11.00 275.00 9 0.0500 14.50 290.00 10 0.0800 24.60 307.50 11 0.1000 29.90 299.00 POINT CUR(A) VTG(V) Z(OHM) 12 0.2000 40.20 201.00 13 0.4000 44.00 110.00 14 0.5000 44.70 89.40 15 0.8000 46.20 57.75 16 1.0000 46.70 46.70 CT Excitation Plot 1 V 10 V 100 V1000 V10000 V2000 V .001 A .01 A 0.1 A 1.0 A 10 A EZCT-2000 Software Version: 1.35 www.vanguard-instruments.com FILENAME: RunTest.test DATE: 04/15/15 14:23:53 COMPANY: FSG STATION: North Lake Pump Stat CIRCUIT: X3 MFR: ABB MODEL: SN: 401435 OPERATOR: BStark COMMENTS: Metering CT SUMMARY REPORT KNEE TYPE: IEEE 30 Deg FREQUENCY: 60 Hz Test Tap IEEE30 IEEE45 IEC 10/50 NP-Ratio M-Ratio % Error Phase Angle Winding Res 1 X1-X2 32.88 24.16 37.32 150/5.0 29.948 0.1733 % 0.06° 87.98 m-ohms CT Excitation Plot 1 V 10 V 100 V1000 V10000 V2000 V .001 A .01 A 0.1 A 1.0 A 10 A Test Notepad EZCT-2000 Software Version: 1.35 www.vanguard-instruments.com CONTACT MEASUREMENT OVERPOTENTIAL TEST N/A Low Resistance Ohmmeter Torque Wrench Thermographic Survey Inspect anchorage, alignment, grounding, arc chutes. Inspect moving and stationary contacts for condition, wear and alignment. 03-031 / 06-052 / 04-049 BStark / WCauthenTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.15015-MVCB_R1, Last Revision Date 1/23/2014Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: DATE SUBSTATION Main Pump 1CIRCUIT ID 4/14/2015 TEMPERATURE 62 °F HUMIDITY 75 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com MEDIUM-VOLTAGE CIRCUIT BREAKER USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 3 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 Compare nameplate data with drawings & specifications.** Note D1Verify**/Utilize** correct application of manufacturer's recommended lubricants. Check cell fit and element alignment. Note D3Check racking mechanism. Clean unit prior to testing unless as-found and as-left tests are required.*** .25 N/A N/A N/A 3.75 .25 N/A 3.75 **Acceptance Testing Only ***Maintenance Testing Only TEST RESULTS Test kV POLE 2 VISUAL & MECHANICAL INSPECTION Sat Unsat N/A Note No.:Sat Unsat N/A Note No.: Note D1 Inspect puffer operation.Inspect physical and mechanical condition. Perform circuit breaker travel time test. Verify that all maintenance devices are available for servicing and operating the breaker. Note D2 N/A POLE 1 POLE 2 POLE 3 .25 POLE 1 (P1-P2)POLE 2 (P2-P3)POLE 3 (P1-P3) 1030 382 78 1610 750 50.6 1330 1040 47.6 VOLTAGE RANGE PICK-UP VOLTAGE 3.8125 N/A MANUFACTURER: BREAKER TYPE: INTERRUPT CAPACITY: INTERRUPTING TIME: OTHER:IB-GEH-2000 PICK-UP VOLTAGE TEST Pole to Pole Pole to Frame Line to Load POLE 3 POLE 1 POLE 2VACUUM BOTTLE INTEGRITY POLE 3 Perform all mechanical operator (inc. slow close) and contact alignment tests on both the breaker and its operating mechanism. Inspect all bolted electrical connections for high resistance using one of the following methods: OPERATIONAL TESTS Open Speed Close Speed Contact Gap Contact Erosion D4 D4 D4 D4 D4 Performed/ Verified Note No. Trip and close breaker with control switch. Trip breaker by operating each protective device. Verify trip-free and anitpump function. Perform insulation resistance test on control wiring. Verify operation of heaters. N/A Close Coil 125 DC 90-130 Shunt Trip 48 DC 28-60 Solenoid21kAMAX VOLTAGE: AMPACITY: SERIAL NO.: CATALOG: kV4.76 8 Cycles Magneblast AGE:AM-2.4/4.16-100/150-S 01629AS LEFT POLE 1 POLE 2 POLE 3 AS LEFT AS FOUND AS LEFT AS FOUND AS LEFTAS FOUND CONTACT RESISTANCE (Microhms) RESISTANCE MEASUREMENTS 54 Test kV POLE 1 POLE 3 20 Line Load BOLTED CONNECTION RESISTANCE (Microhms) POLE 2 23.5 14DC 01629COUNTER READING AS FOUND POLE 1BLOWOUT COIL RESISTANCE (Ohms) TIMING TEST POLE 1 POLE 2 POLE 3 (in inches) General Electric 2.5 kVdc N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 63 63 65 65 39 39 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1200 BIL LEVEL: 4.16 kV 12/56 60 OPERATING VOLTAGE: OPERATING MECHANISM: 433A953-52 Megohm @INSULATION RESISTANCE in (in microamps) COMMENTS:1. Counter does not operate. DEFICIENCIES:1. Mechanism does not have any lubrication. What lubrication was there had dried and is no longer good. The mech was sprayed with lube so it would operate. 2. The manual closing jack assembly is not on site. Unable to perform slow closing of breaker. 3. The racking mechanism is missing parts and also the racking motor is missing. 4. Unable to verify any control wiring due to bad connections, relays not working properly and possible interlocks not found on drawing. Heater wiring is bad also. Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com MEDIUM-VOLTAGE CIRCUIT BREAKER 4PAGE www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.15015-MVCB_R1, Last Revision Date 1/23/2014Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. DEFICIENCIES:5. Contact resistance and Insulation resistance is out of NETA Specifications. CONTACT MEASUREMENT OVERPOTENTIAL TEST N/A Low Resistance Ohmmeter Torque Wrench Thermographic Survey Inspect anchorage, alignment, grounding, arc chutes. Inspect moving and stationary contacts for condition, wear and alignment. 03-031 / 06-052 / 04-049 BStark / WCauthenTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.15015-MVCB_R1, Last Revision Date 1/23/2014Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: DATE SUBSTATION Main Pump 2CIRCUIT ID 4/14/2015 TEMPERATURE 62 °F HUMIDITY 75 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com MEDIUM-VOLTAGE CIRCUIT BREAKER USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 5 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 Compare nameplate data with drawings & specifications.** Note D1Verify**/Utilize** correct application of manufacturer's recommended lubricants. Check cell fit and element alignment. Note D3Check racking mechanism. Clean unit prior to testing unless as-found and as-left tests are required.*** .25 N/A N/A N/A 3.75 .25 N/A 3.75 **Acceptance Testing Only ***Maintenance Testing Only TEST RESULTS Test kV POLE 2 VISUAL & MECHANICAL INSPECTION Sat Unsat N/A Note No.:Sat Unsat N/A Note No.: Note D1 Inspect puffer operation.Inspect physical and mechanical condition. Perform circuit breaker travel time test. Verify that all maintenance devices are available for servicing and operating the breaker. Note D2 N/A POLE 1 POLE 2 POLE 3 .25 POLE 1 (P1-P2)POLE 2 (P2-P3)POLE 3 (P1-P3) 1030 382 78 1610 750 50.6 1330 1040 47.6 VOLTAGE RANGE PICK-UP VOLTAGE 3.8125 N/A MANUFACTURER: BREAKER TYPE: INTERRUPT CAPACITY: INTERRUPTING TIME: OTHER:IB-GEH-2000 PICK-UP VOLTAGE TEST Pole to Pole Pole to Frame Line to Load POLE 3 POLE 1 POLE 2VACUUM BOTTLE INTEGRITY POLE 3 Perform all mechanical operator (inc. slow close) and contact alignment tests on both the breaker and its operating mechanism. Inspect all bolted electrical connections for high resistance using one of the following methods: OPERATIONAL TESTS Open Speed Close Speed Contact Gap Contact Erosion D4 D4 D4 D4 D4 Performed/ Verified Note No. Trip and close breaker with control switch. Trip breaker by operating each protective device. Verify trip-free and anitpump function. Perform insulation resistance test on control wiring. Verify operation of heaters. N/A Close Coil 125 DC 90-130 Shunt Trip 48 DC 28-60 Solenoid21kAMAX VOLTAGE: AMPACITY: SERIAL NO.: CATALOG: kV4.76 8 Cycles Magneblast AGE:AM-2.4/4.16-100/150-S 00268AS LEFT POLE 1 POLE 2 POLE 3 AS LEFT AS FOUND AS LEFT AS FOUND AS LEFTAS FOUND CONTACT RESISTANCE (Microhms) RESISTANCE MEASUREMENTS 54 Test kV POLE 1 POLE 3 20 Line Load BOLTED CONNECTION RESISTANCE (Microhms) POLE 2 23.5 14DC 01629COUNTER READING AS FOUND POLE 1BLOWOUT COIL RESISTANCE (Ohms) TIMING TEST POLE 1 POLE 2 POLE 3 (in inches) General Electric 2.5 kVdc N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1200 BIL LEVEL: 4.16 kV 12/56 60 OPERATING VOLTAGE: OPERATING MECHANISM: 433A953-52 Megohm @INSULATION RESISTANCE in (in microamps) COMMENTS:1. Counter does not operate. DEFICIENCIES:1. Mechanism does not have any lubrication. What lubrication was there had dried and is no longer good. The mech was sprayed with lube so it would operate. 2. The manual closing jack assembly is not on site. Unable to perform slow closing of breaker. 3. The racking mechanism is missing parts and also the racking motor is missing. 4. Unable to verify any control wiring due to bad connections, relays not working properly and possible interlocks not found on drawing. Heater wiring is bad also. Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com MEDIUM-VOLTAGE CIRCUIT BREAKER 6PAGE www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.15015-MVCB_R1, Last Revision Date 1/23/2014Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. DEFICIENCIES:5. Insulation resistance doe not pass NETA specifications on Line to Load testing. CONTACT MEASUREMENT OVERPOTENTIAL TEST N/A Low Resistance Ohmmeter Torque Wrench Thermographic Survey Inspect anchorage, alignment, grounding, arc chutes. Inspect moving and stationary contacts for condition, wear and alignment. 03-031 / 06-052 / 04-049 BStark / WCauthenTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.15015-MVCB_R1, Last Revision Date 1/23/2014Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: DATE SUBSTATION Main Pump 3CIRCUIT ID 4/15/2015 TEMPERATURE 59 °F HUMIDITY 78 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com MEDIUM-VOLTAGE CIRCUIT BREAKER USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 7 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 Compare nameplate data with drawings & specifications.** Note D1Verify**/Utilize** correct application of manufacturer's recommended lubricants. Check cell fit and element alignment. Note D3Check racking mechanism. Clean unit prior to testing unless as-found and as-left tests are required.*** .25 N/A N/A N/A 3.8 .25 N/A 3.8 **Acceptance Testing Only ***Maintenance Testing Only TEST RESULTS Test kV POLE 2 VISUAL & MECHANICAL INSPECTION Sat Unsat N/A Note No.:Sat Unsat N/A Note No.: Note D1 Inspect puffer operation.Inspect physical and mechanical condition. Perform circuit breaker travel time test. Verify that all maintenance devices are available for servicing and operating the breaker. Note D2 N/A POLE 1 POLE 2 POLE 3 .25 POLE 1 (P1-P2)POLE 2 (P2-P3)POLE 3 (P1-P3) 2490 1950 58 1780 620 130 3390 1240 69 VOLTAGE RANGE PICK-UP VOLTAGE 3.8125 N/A MANUFACTURER: BREAKER TYPE: INTERRUPT CAPACITY: INTERRUPTING TIME: OTHER:IB-GEH-2000 PICK-UP VOLTAGE TEST Pole to Pole Pole to Frame Line to Load POLE 3 POLE 1 POLE 2VACUUM BOTTLE INTEGRITY POLE 3 Perform all mechanical operator (inc. slow close) and contact alignment tests on both the breaker and its operating mechanism. Inspect all bolted electrical connections for high resistance using one of the following methods: OPERATIONAL TESTS Open Speed Close Speed Contact Gap Contact Erosion D4 D4 D4 D4 D4 Performed/ Verified Note No. Trip and close breaker with control switch. Trip breaker by operating each protective device. Verify trip-free and anitpump function. Perform insulation resistance test on control wiring. Verify operation of heaters. N/A Close Coil 125 DC 90-130 Shunt Trip 48 DC 28-60 Solenoid25kAMAX VOLTAGE: AMPACITY: SERIAL NO.: CATALOG: kV4.76 8 Cycles Magneblast AGE:AM-4.16-150-4S 00664AS LEFT POLE 1 POLE 2 POLE 3 AS LEFT AS FOUND AS LEFT AS FOUND AS LEFTAS FOUND CONTACT RESISTANCE (Microhms) RESISTANCE MEASUREMENTS 21 Test kV POLE 1 POLE 3 26 Line Load BOLTED CONNECTION RESISTANCE (Microhms) POLE 2 36 14DC 00663COUNTER READING AS FOUND POLE 1BLOWOUT COIL RESISTANCE (Ohms) TIMING TEST POLE 1 POLE 2 POLE 3 (in inches) General Electric 2.5 kVdc N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 96 96 113 113 131 131 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1200 BIL LEVEL: 4.16 kV 02/66 60 OPERATING VOLTAGE: OPERATING MECHANISM: 0179A4360-001 Megohm @INSULATION RESISTANCE in (in microamps) COMMENTS:1. Counter does not operate properly. DEFICIENCIES:1. Mechanism does not have any lubrication. What lubrication was there had dried and is no longer good. The mech was sprayed with lube so it would operate. 2. The manual closing jack assembly is not on site. Unable to perform slow closing of breaker. 3. The racking mechanism is missing parts and also the racking motor is missing. 4. Unable to verify any control wiring due to bad connections, relays not working properly and possible interlocks not found on drawing. Heater wiring is bad also. Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com MEDIUM-VOLTAGE CIRCUIT BREAKER 8PAGE www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.15015-MVCB_R1, Last Revision Date 1/23/2014Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. DEFICIENCIES:5. Cell side bottles leaking. Recommend to replace. 6. Contact resistance is higher than expected for amperage of breaker. Insulation resistance is out of NETA specifications. CONNECTION TIGHTENED 08-024 B.HasleyTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.45001, Last Revision Date 08/11/2009Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: DATE SUBSTATION Main Main TransformerCIRCUIT ID 4/16/2015 TEMPERATURE 65 °F HUMIDITY 83 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com OVERCURRENT RELAY USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 9 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 SEAL - ININSTANTANEOUS AS LEFTAS FOUND 3.5 N/A 3.5 N/A Unsat Sat Unsat AS FOUND AS LEFT AS FOUND AS LEFT N/A N/A N/A N/A .2 N/A .2 N/ANEU/GND RELAY RELAY SETTINGS NEUTRAL/GROUND 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D N/A N/A N/A N/A /Amps @ /sec. sec. PHASE RELAY B PHASEA PHASE Test // TAP / TIME DIAL Amps @ TCC. No.: DISC CLEARANCE BEARING CONDITION BEARING ENDPLAY SPIRAL SPRING GLASS CONDITION NO FOREIGN MATERIAL NO MOISTURE PRESENT COVER GASKET CHECK LEDs N/ASat VISUAL AND MECHANICAL INSPECTION N/A GLASS CLEANED CASE CLEANED RELAY CLEANED TAPS TIGHTENED CONTACTS CLEANED INSULATION RESISTANCE CT SHORTING BAR REMOVED Note No.:Note No.: (PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY) (PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY)(PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY) Model: Seal-In Range: 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 121AC53A3A 0.2-2 Serial:N/A CURVE SPECSTEST AMPS PICKUP AMPS Test Instantaneous Pick-up Amps Instantaneous Drop-out Amps Seal-in Pick-up Amps Seal-in Drop-out Amps Time Dial Zero Check Targets C PHASE Test NAMEPLATE DATA / N/A/ N/A N/A / / CT Ratio: Type/Style Number.: Inst. Range: Instruction Booklet: N/A N/A N/A :5 Pickup Range: Manuf. .5-2 N/A N/A / / / / N/A N/A N/A IAC N/A GEH-1788 / / / 1D /Amps @ /sec.1D 1D 1D 1D 1D N/A N/A1D Devices Operated: PHASE / (NEUT / GRND)PHASE / (NEUT / GRND)INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL 1DPICKUP TESTSGeneral Electric N/A COMMENTS: DEFICIENCIES:1D. RELAY WILL NOT PRODUCE CONSISTANT RESULTS DUE TO CORROSION. RELAY RED TAGGED AND RECOMMEND REPLACING. CONNECTION TIGHTENED 08-024 B.HasleyTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.45001, Last Revision Date 08/11/2009Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: DATE SUBSTATION Main Main TransformerCIRCUIT ID 4/16/2015 TEMPERATURE 65 °F HUMIDITY 83 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com OVERCURRENT RELAY USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 10 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 SEAL - ININSTANTANEOUS AS LEFTAS FOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A Unsat Sat Unsat AS FOUND AS LEFT AS FOUND AS LEFT 40-64 N/A 40-64 N/A .2 N/A .2 N/ANEU/GND RELAY RELAY SETTINGS NEUTRAL/GROUND 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D N/A N/A N/A N/A /Amps @ /sec. sec. PHASE RELAY B PHASEA PHASE Test // TAP / TIME DIAL Amps @ TCC. No.: DISC CLEARANCE BEARING CONDITION BEARING ENDPLAY SPIRAL SPRING GLASS CONDITION NO FOREIGN MATERIAL NO MOISTURE PRESENT COVER GASKET CHECK LEDs N/ASat VISUAL AND MECHANICAL INSPECTION N/A GLASS CLEANED CASE CLEANED RELAY CLEANED TAPS TIGHTENED CONTACTS CLEANED INSULATION RESISTANCE CT SHORTING BAR REMOVED Note No.:Note No.: (PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY) (PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY)(PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY) Model: Seal-In Range: 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A I2PJC3ID89A 0.2-2 Serial:N/A CURVE SPECSTEST AMPS PICKUP AMPS Test Instantaneous Pick-up Amps Instantaneous Drop-out Amps Seal-in Pick-up Amps Seal-in Drop-out Amps Time Dial Zero Check Targets Other C PHASE Test NAMEPLATE DATA / N/A/ N/A N/A / / CT Ratio: Type/Style Number.: Inst. Range: Instruction Booklet: N/A N/A N/A :5 Pickup Range: Manuf. 40-160 N/A N/A / / / / N/A N/A N/A IAC N/A GEI-83903 / / / 1D /Amps @ /sec.1D 1D 1D 1D 1D N/A N/A1D Devices Operated: PHASE / (NEUT / GRND)PHASE / (NEUT / GRND)INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL 1DPICKUP TESTSGeneral Electric N/A COMMENTS: DEFICIENCIES:1D. RELAY WILL NOT PRODUCE CONSISTANT RESULTS DUE TO CORROSION. RELAY RED TAGGED AND RECOMMEND REPLACING. CONNECTION TIGHTENED 08-024 B.HasleyTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.45001, Last Revision Date 08/11/2009Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: DATE SUBSTATION Main Pump 1CIRCUIT ID 3/19/15 TEMPERATURE 76 °F HUMIDITY 85 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com OVERCURRENT RELAY USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 11 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 SEAL - ININSTANTANEOUS AS LEFTAS FOUND 4.5/4 N/A 4.5/4 N/A Unsat Sat Unsat AS FOUND AS LEFT AS FOUND AS LEFT 35 N/A 35 N/A 2 N/A 2 N/ANEU/GND RELAY RELAY SETTINGS NEUTRAL/GROUND SAT UNSAT SAT UNSAT SAT UNSAT SAT UNSAT SAT UNSAT SAT N/A N/A N/A N/A /Amps @ /sec. sec. PHASE RELAY B PHASEA PHASE Test // TAP / TIME DIAL Amps @ TCC. No.: DISC CLEARANCE BEARING CONDITION BEARING ENDPLAY SPIRAL SPRING GLASS CONDITION NO FOREIGN MATERIAL NO MOISTURE PRESENT COVER GASKET CHECK LEDs N/ASat VISUAL AND MECHANICAL INSPECTION N/A GLASS CLEANED CASE CLEANED RELAY CLEANED TAPS TIGHTENED CONTACTS CLEANED INSULATION RESISTANCE CT SHORTING BAR REMOVED Note No.:Note No.: (PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY) (PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY)(PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY) Model: Seal-In Range: 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D 1D N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 121AC66C1A 0.2-2 Serial:N/A CURVE SPECSTEST AMPS 26 PICKUP AMPS 11.25 N/A N/A N/A22N/A13.5 Test Instantaneous Pick-up Amps Instantaneous Drop-out Amps Seal-in Pick-up Amps Seal-in Drop-out Amps Time Dial Zero Check Targets Other C PHASE Test NAMEPLATE DATA / N/A/ N/A N/A / / CT Ratio: Type/Style Number.: Inst. Range: Instruction Booklet: N/A N/A N/A :5 Pickup Range: Manuf. 2.5-5 N/A 52A / / / / N/A N/A N/A IAC 10-40 GEI-28818 / / / 1D 18 /N/A Amps @ 18 /N/A sec.1D 1D 1D 1D 1D N/A N/A1D Devices Operated: PHASE / (NEUT / GRND)PHASE / (NEUT / GRND)INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL UNSATPICKUP TESTSGeneral Electric N/A COMMENTS: DEFICIENCIES:1D. RELAY WILL NOT PRODUCE CONSISTANT RESULTS DUE TO CORROSION. RELAY RED TAGGED AND RECOMMEND REPLACING. CONNECTION TIGHTENED 08-024 B.HasleyTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.45001, Last Revision Date 08/11/2009Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: DATE SUBSTATION Main Pump 2CIRCUIT ID 3/19/15 TEMPERATURE 76 °F HUMIDITY 85 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com OVERCURRENT RELAY USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 12 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 SEAL - ININSTANTANEOUS AS LEFTAS FOUND 4.5/4 N/A 4.5/4 N/A Unsat Sat Unsat AS FOUND AS LEFT AS FOUND AS LEFT 35 N/A 35 N/A 2 N/A 2 N/ANEU/GND RELAY RELAY SETTINGS NEUTRAL/GROUND SAT UNSAT SAT UNSAT SAT UNSAT SAT UNSAT SAT UNSAT SAT N/A N/A N/A N/A /Amps @ /sec. sec. PHASE RELAY B PHASEA PHASE Test // TAP / TIME DIAL Amps @ TCC. No.: DISC CLEARANCE BEARING CONDITION BEARING ENDPLAY SPIRAL SPRING GLASS CONDITION NO FOREIGN MATERIAL NO MOISTURE PRESENT COVER GASKET CHECK LEDs N/ASat VISUAL AND MECHANICAL INSPECTION N/A GLASS CLEANED CASE CLEANED RELAY CLEANED TAPS TIGHTENED CONTACTS CLEANED INSULATION RESISTANCE CT SHORTING BAR REMOVED Note No.:Note No.: (PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY) (PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY)(PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY) Model: Seal-In Range: 36.8 32.3 39 33 2.0 1.3 3.1 36.8 32.3 39 33 2.0 1.3 2.8 32.1 30.5 38 32 2.0 1.2 2.8 32.1 30.5 38 32 2.0 1.2 3.8 47.6 42.3 37.6 31.5 2.10 1.2 3.8 47.6 42.3 37.6 31.5 2.10 1.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 121AC66C1A 0.2-2 Serial:N/A CURVE SPECSTEST AMPS 26 PICKUP AMPS 11.25 N/A N/A N/A22N/A13.5 Test Instantaneous Pick-up Amps Instantaneous Drop-out Amps Seal-in Pick-up Amps Seal-in Drop-out Amps Time Dial Zero Check Targets Other C PHASE Test NAMEPLATE DATA / N/A/ N/A N/A / / CT Ratio: Type/Style Number.: Inst. Range: Instruction Booklet: N/A N/A N/A :5 Pickup Range: Manuf. 2.5-5 N/A 52A / / / / N/A N/A N/A IAC 10-40 GEI-28818 / / / 3.1 18 /N/A Amps @ 18 /N/A sec.15.6 26.8 26.8 24.6 24.6 N/A N/A15.6 Devices Operated: PHASE / (NEUT / GRND)PHASE / (NEUT / GRND)INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL UNSATPICKUP TESTSGeneral Electric N/A COMMENTS: DEFICIENCIES:1D. RELAY WILL NOT PRODUCE CONSISTANT RESULTS DUE TO CORROSION. RELAY RED TAGGED AND RECOMMEND REPLACING. CONNECTION TIGHTENED 08-024 B.HasleyTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.45001, Last Revision Date 08/11/2009Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: DATE SUBSTATION Main Pump 3CIRCUIT ID 3/19/15 TEMPERATURE 76 °F HUMIDITY 85 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com OVERCURRENT RELAY USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 13 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 SEAL - ININSTANTANEOUS AS LEFTAS FOUND 4.5/4 N/A 4.5/4 N/A Unsat Sat Unsat AS FOUND AS LEFT AS FOUND AS LEFT 35 N/A 35 N/A 2 N/A 2 N/ANEU/GND RELAY RELAY SETTINGS NEUTRAL/GROUND SAT UNSAT SAT UNSAT SAT UNSAT SAT UNSAT SAT UNSAT SAT N/A N/A N/A N/A /Amps @ /sec. sec. PHASE RELAY B PHASEA PHASE Test // TAP / TIME DIAL Amps @ TCC. No.: DISC CLEARANCE BEARING CONDITION BEARING ENDPLAY SPIRAL SPRING GLASS CONDITION NO FOREIGN MATERIAL NO MOISTURE PRESENT COVER GASKET CHECK LEDs N/ASat VISUAL AND MECHANICAL INSPECTION N/A GLASS CLEANED CASE CLEANED RELAY CLEANED TAPS TIGHTENED CONTACTS CLEANED INSULATION RESISTANCE CT SHORTING BAR REMOVED Note No.:Note No.: (PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY) (PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY)(PHASE RELAY / NEUTRAL RELAY) Model: Seal-In Range: 20.04 17.52 39 33 2.0 1.6 3.2 20.04 17.52 39 33 2.0 1.6 2.8 14.52 17.92 38 32 2.0 1.6 2.8 14.52 17.92 38 32 2.0 1.6 3.8 10.86 12.56 37.6 31.5 2.10 1.5 3.8 10.86 12.56 37.6 31.5 2.10 1.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 121AC66C1A 0.2-2 Serial:N/A CURVE SPECSTEST AMPS 26 PICKUP AMPS 11.25 N/A N/A N/A22N/A13.5 Test Instantaneous Pick-up Amps Instantaneous Drop-out Amps Seal-in Pick-up Amps Seal-in Drop-out Amps Time Dial Zero Check Targets Other C PHASE Test NAMEPLATE DATA / N/A/ N/A N/A / / CT Ratio: Type/Style Number.: Inst. Range: Instruction Booklet: N/A N/A N/A :5 Pickup Range: Manuf. 2.5-5 N/A 52A / / / / N/A N/A N/A IAC 10-40 GEI-28818 / / / 3.2 18 /N/A Amps @ 18 /N/A sec.14.47 14.63 14.63 13.21 13.21 N/A N/A14.47 Devices Operated: PHASE / (NEUT / GRND)PHASE / (NEUT / GRND)INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL INITIAL FINAL UNSATPICKUP TESTSGeneral Electric N/A COMMENTS: DEFICIENCIES:1D. RELAY WILL NOT PRODUCE CONSISTANT RESULTS DUE TO CORROSION. RELAY RED TAGGED AND RECOMMEND REPLACING. DATE SUBSTATION Main Incoming Undervoltage RelayCIRCUIT ID 3/19/15 TEMPERATURE 76 °F HUMIDITY 85 %EQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com PROTECTIVE RELAY USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 14 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 08-024 B.HasleyTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.46500, Last Revision Date 03/06/2014Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: GLASS CONDITION OK NO FOREIGN MATERIAL NO MOISTURE PRESENT SPIRAL SPRING OK BEARING ENDPLAY OK BEARING CONDITION OK DISC CLEARANCE OK CHECK LEDs CASE CLEANED RELAY CLEANED CONNECTION TIGHTENED TAPS TIGHTENED CONTACTS CLEANED INSULATION RESISTANCE CT SHORTING BAR REMOVED GLASS CLEANEDCOVER GASKET OK UNDERVOLTAGE PICKUP 1D 1D 1DUNDERVOLTAGE TIME DELAY SETTINGS UNDERVOLTAGE PICKUP UNDERVOLTAGE TIME 1D 1D 1D 1D NAMEPLATE INFORMATION TEST RESULTS MANUFACTURER: TYPE:HFA 12HFA11A44EMODEL: RANGE:85- INSTRUCTIONS: OTHER: GEH-1755 GEF-2757 SERIAL:N/APARTS BULLETIN: CURVE NO.: VISUAL & MECHANICAL INSPECTION Sat Unsat N/A Note No.:Sat Unsat N/A Note No.: Initial Final 1D Initial Final General Electric COMMENTS: DEFICIENCIES:1D. RELAY NOT TESTED DUE TO BURNT WIRE GOING TO SOLENOID FAILING AND DAMGING THE RELAY. RELAY HAS BEEN EXPOSED TO EXTREME MOISTURE AND WILL NOT SLIDE OUT OF THE CASE. RELAY RED TAGGED AND RECOMMEND REPLACING. READINGS IN @ RESISTANCE IN @ INSPECT CONTROL POWER TRANSFORMERS Visual and Mechanical Inspection VISUAL AND MECHANICAL INSPECTION OF INSTRUMENT TRANSFORMERS VERIFY THAT FILTERS ARE IN PLACE AND VENTS ARE CLEAR INSPECT MECHANICAL INDICATING DEVICES FOR PROPER OPERATION EXERCISE ALL ACTIVE COMPONENTS VERIFY BARRIER AND SHUTTER INSTALLATION AND OPERATION INSPECT INSULATORS FOR PHYSICAL DAMAGE AND CONTAMINATION VERIFY APPROPRIATE LUBRICATION OF CURRENT-CARRYING AND MECHANICAL PARTS CONFIRM OPERATION AND SEQUENCE OF ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL INTERLOCKS INSPECT BOLTED CONNECTIONS BY DLRO, TORQUE WRENCH OR INFRARED SURVEY VERIFY CURRENT AND VOLTAGE TRANSFORMER RATIOS CORRESPOND TO DRAWINGS VERIFY FUSE AND BREAKER SIZES CORRESPOND TO DRAWINGS AND COORDINATION STUDY COMPARE NAMEPLATE DATA WITH DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS INSPECT ANCHORAGE, ALIGNMENT, GROUNDING AND CLEARANCES INSPECT PHYSICAL AND MECHANICAL CONDITION N/AUnsat TESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.50950, Last Revision Date 5/8/2013Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: DATE SUBSTATION Main SwitchgearCIRCUIT ID TEMPERATURE °F HUMIDITY %EQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com DISTRIBUTION SWITCHGEAR DATASHEET USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 15 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 UNIT IS CLEAN. NO LOOSE PARTS. SHIPPING BRACES AND DOCUMENTATION REMOVED Unsat N/A Note No.:Note No.:SatSat GENERAL INFORMATION CONSISTING OF:TOTAL BREAKERS TOTAL RELAYSTOTAL INSTRUMENTS FROM TO A B C N G BUS SECTION BUS SECTION A-B B-C C-A A-NEU.B-NEU.C-NEU.A-GND B-GND C-GND N-GND 11200 11100 10200 3450 5720 4570 RESISTANCE IN MICRO-OHMS A-B B-C C-A A-NEU.B-NEU.C-NEU.A-GND B-GND C-GND N-GND BUS SECTION TYPE SERIAL NO. Visual and Mechanical Inspection BUS CONNECTIONS OVERPOTENTIAL TEST INSULATION RESISTANCE MEGOHMS KVDC MICROAMPS KVAC MANUFACTURER DWGS. VOLTAGE CLASS COMMENTS:1. Unable to verify control wiring due to added jumpers, cut wires and bad connections due to corrosion. DEFICIENCIES:1. Gasket material has degraded and does not keep water and dirt from getting into switchgear. 2. Kirk Lock for PT drawer had to be destroyed to be able to get into PT drawer. LTC Tank Outdoor C PhaseB Phase VISUAL AND MECHANICAL INSPECTION 17-002 / 04-049 / 18-014 / 22-006 BStark / WCauthenTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.56027, Last Revision Date 3/10/2014Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: Main Tank Mineral Oil Other Silicone 3,136 GallonsN/A Indoor A Phase DATE SUBSTATION Main Main TransformerCIRCUIT ID 3/17/2015 TEMPERATURE 75 °F HUMIDITY 40 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com TRANSFORMER (M4000) USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 16 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 3750 / 4200Rating (kVA): CHL Calculated Results 0.187 0.22 0.22 2,241 CL Low High 2 0.36 7,552.1 0.185 0.22 0.22 2,241.5Calculated ResultsCHL4 5 CL + CHL Low 2High 3 CHL (UST)CHL Direct H - L 10 0.193 0.23 0.23 B 2,240.4 2,354.5B0.390.390.34710Low HighCH2 1 CH + CHL High Low 10 17.327 0.532 4,596 Corr. 20° CMeasured 6 0.23 0.35 B B 2,241.4 5,311.1 0.230.1932L - HCHL DirectCHL (UST)7 8 8.448 8.877 8.446 8.450 28.471 20.023 8.450 Equivalent 10 kV ReadingsTest Connections (Milliamps)(Milliamps) 0.711 10 8.768 6.480 9.322 G Top Oil Temperature (°C):25 Winding Configuration:Wye-Wye OAClass: 7.1Impedance (%): Other Mineral Oil Silicone 0 GallonsN/A SL 136800 4160 Xfmr. Type: High Voltage: Low Voltage: Manufacturer: 3 0HH (Milliamps) 0H2H0HH RatingkVLTC Position DETC PositionTest No.WattsMilliampsTest kVWINDING GUARD WINDING GROUND WINDING ENERGIZEDINSUL.InsulationRatingCapacitance(Picofarads)% Power Factor 0.898 2 Volts Leaks:None Detected Bushings, RadiatorDescribe: Fans N/A Paint Grounds Controls NAMEPLATE INFORMATION INSULATION POWER FACTOR TEST RESULTS EXCITATION RESULTS Serial No.:PCR-94421 Winding (°C):22 PoorFairGood LiquidGas Air 0.99 Explain 1 Correction Factor Connections Control Voltage Westinghouse Manufacturer Type RATIO TEST RESULTS % Power Factor High Side Low Side Neutral 115 23 23 1966 1966 1966 D G Low Side kV 0.5 Min.1 Min.2 Min.5 Min.10 Min.DAR P.I. 1 0 2 0 3 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 342.4 267.44 1,070.7 314.39 345 346 244 3470.5 0.49 0.49 0.5 0.94 0 0.48 0.61 0 0 39.9239.92 0.94 0.48 0.61 5.21 0.121 0.048 0.246 1.305 1.291 1.008 4.037 10 10 10 10 0.5 BH1 H2 H3 H0 H0 X2 X3 3 2 1 0-1 C2 Tap TEST RESULTS Class Cat. No.kV Year High Side Class Cat. No.kV Year D H2 H3 X1 X2 X3 3 0 Test H - L + G L - H + G 1.00Correction Factor MeasuredNameplateNameplate X0Number Bushing/ Arrester Serial No.Test kVMilliamps Watts Measured Corr. 20° C Pwr Factor Picofarads Picofarads Insulation0 H1 ArrestersBUSHING NAMEPLATE ARRESTER NAMEPLATE Tap No.Found Left High / Low Voltage 32.8846 Voltage Ratio 32.99700 32.97600 32.99400 X0 Isolated Only X X X X X01 H 01H 0 2 0H X H 3 H 0 2 H Circuit ID:Main Transformer Serial No:PCR-94421 Megohms 2 LTC Tank:Remove a sample of insulating liquid: Main Tank:High Side Isolated DGA LQS Low Side IsolatedDGA Core Ground @ 500 VDC: Main Tank Ground Strap: N/A LQS Shermco Form No.56027, Last Revision Date 3/10/2014 Unsatisfactory Satisfactory 136800 / 41602 COIL TEST RESULTS (IN OHMS) Winding Temp. (Degrees C)Tap 22 2 5 INSULATION RESISTANCE TEST RESULTS (IN MEGOHMS) Westinghouse Westinghouse Westinghouse Manufacturer O O O Type H .009791 .00973 .00970 XXHHHHHX X XX 2 2.5 T - L - G Outdoor 04-049 / 18-014 BStark / WCauthenTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.56040, Last Revision Date 7/22/2013Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: LTC Tank Main Tank Mineral Oil Other Silicone 13 GallonsN/A Indoor DATE SUBSTATION Main CPT's Center CPTCIRCUIT ID 4/15/2015 TEMPERATURE 70 °F HUMIDITY 63 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com TRANSFORMER DATA SHEET USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 18 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 15Rating (kVA): Top Oil Temperature (°C):15 Winding Configuration:Single Phase OA (Distribution)Class: 2.4Impedance (%): Other Mineral Oil Silicone GallonsN/A (PBSR) Pole Mount 4160 120 / 240 Xfmr. Type: High Voltage: Low Voltage: Manufacturer: Volts Leaks: Fans Paint Grounds Controls Control Voltage Serial No.:2088315 Winding (°C):15 LiquidAir 1 2XXXXX31 H 21H 3 1 2H X 1 2 2 H 5 Min.10 Min.DAR P.I. H HH H H X XH X X X X Test 3 1 1 2 2 3 0 1 0 2 0 3 00 0 000N/A TapWinding Temp. (Degrees C) COIL TEST RESULTS (IN OHMS) N/A H - L + G 2.5 94.8 3150.5L - H + G kV Voltage Ratio High / Low VoltageLeftFoundTap No. H H RATIO TEST RESULTS 2400 / 240 9.908 19.92219.9252400 / 120 Good Fair Poor Connections Describe: Main Tank:LTC Tank: LQSLQS DGA DGA Gas None Detected Megohms Unsatisfactory Satisfactory High Side Isolated Main Tank Ground Strap: Core Ground @ 500 VDC: Remove a sample of insulating liquid: 0.5 Min.1 Min. VISUAL & MECHANICAL INSPECTION Explain N/A N/A N/A Low Side Isolated X0 Isolated Only 2 Min. INSULATION RESISTANCE TEST RESULTS (IN MEGOHMS) NAMEPLATE INFORMATION 10 1: :120 : : : : : Allis-Chalmers COMMENTS:1. Cable from switchgear and all three transformers included on insulation resistance test H-L+G. 2. Fuse Info:GE, Type:EJ-1, CAT#6193404, Nom Volts: 4800, Amp:1.0E, Size C, INST:GE-10951, Max DES Volts:5500 3. Fuse Resistance 1.1, DEFICIENCIES:1. Low side cables insulation is coming off. 2. Insulation resistance does not meet NETA specifications. Outdoor 04-049 / 18-014 BStark / WCauthenTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.56040, Last Revision Date 7/22/2013Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: LTC Tank Main Tank Mineral Oil Other Silicone 15 GallonsN/A Indoor DATE SUBSTATION Main CPT's East CPTCIRCUIT ID 4/15/2015 TEMPERATURE 70 °F HUMIDITY 63 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com TRANSFORMER DATA SHEET USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 19 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 15Rating (kVA): Top Oil Temperature (°C):15 Winding Configuration:Single Phase OA (Distribution)Class: 2.4Impedance (%): Other Mineral Oil Silicone GallonsN/A (PBSR) Pole Mount 4160 120 / 240 Xfmr. Type: High Voltage: Low Voltage: Manufacturer: Volts Leaks: Fans Paint Grounds Controls Control Voltage Serial No.:2015626 Winding (°C):15 LiquidAir 1 2XXXXX31 H 21H 3 1 2H X 1 2 2 H 5 Min.10 Min.DAR P.I. H HH H H X XH X X X X Test 3 1 1 2 2 3 0 1 0 2 0 3 00 0 000N/A TapWinding Temp. (Degrees C) COIL TEST RESULTS (IN OHMS) N/A H - L + G 2.5 94.8 95.80.5L - H + G kV Voltage Ratio High / Low VoltageLeftFoundTap No. H H RATIO TEST RESULTS 2400 / 240 10.022 20.0520.0492400 / 120 Good Fair Poor Connections Describe: Main Tank:LTC Tank: LQSLQS DGA DGA Gas None Detected Megohms Unsatisfactory Satisfactory High Side Isolated Main Tank Ground Strap: Core Ground @ 500 VDC: Remove a sample of insulating liquid: 0.5 Min.1 Min. VISUAL & MECHANICAL INSPECTION Explain N/A N/A N/A Low Side Isolated X0 Isolated Only 2 Min. INSULATION RESISTANCE TEST RESULTS (IN MEGOHMS) NAMEPLATE INFORMATION 10 1: :120 : : : : : Allis-Chalmers COMMENTS:1. Cable from switchgear and all three transformers included on insulation resistance test H-L+G. DEFICIENCIES:1. Low side cables insulation is coming off. 2. X1 bushing was found loose. 3. Insulation resistance does not meet NETA specifications. Outdoor 04-049 / 18-014 BStark / WCauthenTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.56040, Last Revision Date 7/22/2013Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: LTC Tank Main Tank Mineral Oil Other Silicone 15 GallonsN/A Indoor DATE SUBSTATION Main CPT's West CPTCIRCUIT ID 4/15/2015 TEMPERATURE 70 °F HUMIDITY 63 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com TRANSFORMER DATA SHEET USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 20 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 15Rating (kVA): Top Oil Temperature (°C):15 Winding Configuration:Single Phase OA (Distribution)Class: 2.6Impedance (%): Other Mineral Oil Silicone GallonsN/A (PBSR) Pole Mount 4160 120 / 240 Xfmr. Type: High Voltage: Low Voltage: Manufacturer: Volts Leaks: Fans Paint Grounds Controls Control Voltage Serial No.:1910124 Winding (°C):15 LiquidAir 1 2XXXXX31 H 21H 3 1 2H X 1 2 2 H 5 Min.10 Min.DAR P.I. H HH H H X XH X X X X Test 3 1 1 2 2 3 0 1 0 2 0 3 00 0 000N/A TapWinding Temp. (Degrees C) COIL TEST RESULTS (IN OHMS) N/A H - L + G 2.5 94.8 2270.5L - H + G kV Voltage Ratio High / Low VoltageLeftFoundTap No. H H RATIO TEST RESULTS 2400 / 240 10.027 20.04820.0922400 / 120 Good Fair Poor Connections Describe: Main Tank:LTC Tank: LQSLQS DGA DGA Gas None Detected Megohms Unsatisfactory Satisfactory High Side Isolated Main Tank Ground Strap: Core Ground @ 500 VDC: Remove a sample of insulating liquid: 0.5 Min.1 Min. VISUAL & MECHANICAL INSPECTION Explain N/A N/A N/A Low Side Isolated X0 Isolated Only 2 Min. INSULATION RESISTANCE TEST RESULTS (IN MEGOHMS) NAMEPLATE INFORMATION 10 1: :120 : : : : : Allis-Chalmers COMMENTS:1. Cable from switchgear and all three transformers included on insulation resistance test H-L+G. DEFICIENCIES:1. Low side cables insulation is coming off. 2. Insulation resistance does not meet NETA specifications. ***Maintenance Testing Only**Acceptance Testing Only Circuit Burden Test Fuse Resistance Measurements Fuse Resistance Measurements Clean unit prior to testing unless as found and as left tests are required.*** 04-049 / 18-014 BStark / WCauthenTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.56225, Last Revision Date 2/17/2011Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: DATE SUBSTATION Main Incoming PT'sCIRCUIT ID 4/16/2015 TEMPERATURE 65 °F HUMIDITY 84 %EQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com INSTRUMENT TRANSFORMERS VOLTAGE TRANSFORMERS USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 21 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 Type:Class: Ratio: Other Data: Style/Catalog No: Primary Voltage:Accuracy Class: NAMEPLATE DATA P.T. Secondary Taps Circuit Burden Test (Optional) P.T. Secondary Taps Secondary Circuit Burden Test (Optional) P.T. Secondary Taps (Optional) Calc. ImpedanceMeasured AmpsApplied Voltage N/A N/A N/A Calc. ImpedanceMeasured AmpsApplied Voltage N/A N/A N/A Applied Voltage Measured Amps Calc. Impedance .5 X1 X2 Secondary to Ground Secondary to Ground X2X1 X2X1 Secondary to Ground Primary H2H1 Primary H1 H2 Primary H2H1 2.5 @ KVDC 10700 Prim. - Sec.Prim. - Gnd. 10700 Sec. - Gnd. 176 @ KVDC 2.5 10700 Prim. - Sec. 10700 Prim. - Gnd.Sec. - Gnd. 176 @ KVDC Prim. - Sec.Prim. - Gnd.Sec. - Gnd. Fuse Resistance Measurements Inspect all bolted electrical connections for high resistance using one of the following methods: Verify all required grounding. Verify correct connection of transformers with system requirements.** Compare nameplate data with drawings and specifications.** Verify that adequate clearances exist between primary and secondary circuit wiring.** Inspect physical and mechanical condition. Low Resistance Ohmmeter Torque Wrench Thermographic Survey VISUAL AND MECHANICAL INSPECTION Sat Unsat N/A Note No.:Sat Unsat N/A Note No.: Type:Type: Manufacturer: Class: Amps: Inter. Rating: Other Data: Manufacturer: Class: Amps: Inter. Rating: Other Data: Voltage: SECONDARY FUSE DATA Manufacturer: PRIMARY FUSE DATA P.T. Identification Primary P.T. Identification Nameplate Ratio Measured Ratio Nameplate Ratio Primary Measured Ratio P.T. Identification Nameplate Ratio Measured Ratio Primary Polarity @ KVDC Sec.Insulation Resistance (Megohms).5 Polarity @ KVDC Sec.Insulation Resistance (Megohms) Polarity Insulation Resistance (Megohms) @ KVDC Sec. Secondary Secondary Voltage: B.I.L.: ELECTRICAL TESTS ELECTRICAL TESTS ELECTRICAL TESTS 2.79 2.77 Ratio and Polarity C813595 X1-X2 35:1 35.141 H1 X1 2.75 2.79 Ratio and Polarity C808654 X1-X2 35:1 35.175 H1 X1 X1-X2 Ratio and Polarity VA Rating: General Electric General Electric N/A 582X73 4200 200 EJ-1 4800 Cat #6293011G11 .5 E E-22 Unknown Unknown Model #3127404-134 35:1 Unknown (microhms) (microhms) (microhms) COMMENTS: DEFICIENCIES: ***Maintenance Testing Only**Acceptance Testing Only Circuit Burden Test Fuse Resistance Measurements Fuse Resistance Measurements Clean unit prior to testing unless as found and as left tests are required.*** 04-049 / 18-014 BStark / WCauthenTESTED BY: www.shermco.com Shermco Form No.56225, Last Revision Date 2/17/2011Copyright © Shermco Industries, Inc. TEST EQUIPMENT USED: DATE SUBSTATION Metering PT's Metering PT'sCIRCUIT ID 4/16/2015 TEMPERATURE 65 °F HUMIDITY 84 %North Lake Pump StationEQPT. LOCATION Shermco Industries, Inc Corporate Headquarters 2425 E. Pioneer Drive Irving, Texas 75061 1-888-SHERMCO www.shermco.com INSTRUMENT TRANSFORMERS VOLTAGE TRANSFORMERS USER ADDRESS CUSTOMER JOB # FSG Electric 82000030 22 2525 Walnut Hill Lane; Suite 100; Dallas TX 75229 CMMS # PAGE North Lake Pump Station; 14001 S Northlake Rd; Coppell TX 75119 Type:Class: Ratio: Other Data: Style/Catalog No: Primary Voltage:Accuracy Class: NAMEPLATE DATA P.T. Secondary Taps Circuit Burden Test (Optional) P.T. Secondary Taps Secondary Circuit Burden Test (Optional) P.T. Secondary Taps (Optional) Calc. ImpedanceMeasured AmpsApplied Voltage N/A N/A N/A Calc. ImpedanceMeasured AmpsApplied Voltage N/A N/A N/A Applied Voltage Measured Amps Calc. Impedance N/A 1 1 X1 X2 Secondary to Ground Secondary to Ground X2X1 X2X1 Secondary to Ground Primary H2H1 Primary H1 H2 Primary H2H1 2.5 @ KVDC Prim. - Sec.Prim. - Gnd.Sec. - Gnd. 338 @ KVDC 2.5 Prim. - Sec.Prim. - Gnd.Sec. - Gnd. 338 2.5 @ KVDC Prim. - Sec.Prim. - Gnd.Sec. - Gnd. 338 Fuse Resistance Measurements Inspect all bolted electrical connections for high resistance using one of the following methods: Verify all required grounding. Verify correct connection of transformers with system requirements.** Compare nameplate data with drawings and specifications.** Verify that adequate clearances exist between primary and secondary circuit wiring.** Inspect physical and mechanical condition. Low Resistance Ohmmeter Torque Wrench Thermographic Survey VISUAL AND MECHANICAL INSPECTION Sat Unsat N/A Note No.:Sat Unsat N/A Note No.: Type:Type: Manufacturer: Class: Amps: Inter. Rating: Other Data: Manufacturer: Class: Amps: Inter. Rating: Other Data: Voltage: SECONDARY FUSE DATA Manufacturer: PRIMARY FUSE DATA P.T. Identification Primary P.T. Identification Nameplate Ratio Measured Ratio Nameplate Ratio Primary Measured Ratio P.T. Identification Nameplate Ratio Measured Ratio Primary Polarity @ KVDC Sec.Insulation Resistance (Megohms)1 Polarity @ KVDC Sec.Insulation Resistance (Megohms) Polarity Insulation Resistance (Megohms) @ KVDC Sec. Secondary Secondary Voltage: B.I.L.: ELECTRICAL TESTS ELECTRICAL TESTS ELECTRICAL TESTS .30 Ratio and Polarity 5483571 X1-X2 20:1 19.97 H1 X1 .30 Ratio and Polarity 5483719 X1-X2 20:1 19.963 H1 X1 X1H119.96520:1X1-X25483576 Ratio and Polarity N/A N/A VA Rating: General Electric 763X30G1 2400 750 4800 JVW-3 60 .3 GEH-230 20:1 Unknown (microhms) (microhms) (microhms) COMMENTS:1. Fuse Holder S&C SMU-20 DEFICIENCIES:1. Secondary wiring is very corroded. Wiring compartment is wet. Oil Samples Page 1 of 2OIL SAMPLE REPORT CUSTOMER DATA SAMPLE DATA Customer:FSG Electric Shop Order#:5-5357-05 2525 Walnut Hill Lane Suite 100 Dallas Tx 75229 (214) 357-5697 (214) 357-5794 Phone: FAX:jerrtb@fsgi.comE-Mail: Contact: EXT (214) 837-1731Cell: 3/19/2015Received Date: Reported Date:3/23/2015 Customer PO#:30P 199008 Serial#PCR-94421 Location Northlake PS Gallons 3136 Mfg.Westinghouse Primary Voltage kV 136.8 KVA:3750/4200 Imp. (% Z)7.1 Voltage Class >69kV - <230kV Phase 3 Phase Tank Transformer Breathing Sealed Fluid Mineral Oil JERRY BEAVERS Equip ID Main XFMR One Line. One Company. Houston Service Center 33002 FM 2004 Angleton, Texas 77515 p. 979.848.1406 f. 979.848.0012 houston@shermco.com Date Sampled: Oil Temp ( C ): Hydrogen ( H2 ): Methane ( CH4 ): Ethane ( C2H6 ): Ethylene ( C2H4 ): Acetylene ( C2H2 ): Carbon Monoxide ( CO ): Nitrogen ( N2 ): Oxygen ( O2 ): Tot Dissolved Gas: Tot Dissolved Combustible Gas: Equivalent TCG %: Moisture PPM: Interfacial Tension ( dynes/cm ): Acid Number ( mg KH/g ): Color Number ( Relative ): Visual Exam ( Relative ): Sediment Exam ( Relative ): Dielectric Breakdown ( kV): Dielectric Breakdown 1 mm (kV mm-C): Dielectric Breakdown 2 mm (kV mm-C): Power Factor @ 25C ( % ): Power Factor @ 100C ( % ): Specific Gravity ( Relative ): Passivator ( ppm ): Oxidation Inhibitor ( wt. % ): Carbon Dioxide ( CO2 ): 3/18/2015 22 5 1 6 0 0 12 82412 15024 98007 24 0.01 11.2 34.4 .01 1.0 Yellow ND 40.4 .036 .811 .880 543 shermco.com O2 Diagnosis - Leak to atmosphere, air vented N2 Diagnosis - Pad gas Total Combustible Gas - OK, Continue routine operation Relative Saturation - 7.46% Page 2 of 2 Customer:FSG Electric Shop Order#:5-5357-05 Customer PO#:30P 199008 Serial#PCR-94421 Location Northlake PS Equip ID Main XFMR Results Recommendations Sample data ok. Unit is in condition 1. No action required. Continue to monitor at normal sampling schedule. See attached particle count report. One Line. One Company. Houston Service Center 33002 FM 2004 Angleton, Texas 77515 p. 979.848.1406 f. 979.848.0012 houston@shermco.com shermco.com Sample - PPM Database:Shermco Database.rbm Equipment:E1 - Transformers Area:A192 - FSG Electric Point:P1 - Main Transformer Sample Date 3/23/2015 Sample #17293 Unit Usage - hrs Oil Usage - hrs Oil Added - gus W ear 0 Aluminum Chromium Copper Iron Lead Nickel Tin Ferrous Idx 0.0 LCont Ferrous LCont NonFe Contamination 5 Boron Silicon Sodium Contam Idx % Water LCont Droplet Cnts >4 855 Cnts >6 35 Cnts >14 1 Cnts >22 1 Cnts >38 1 Cnts >56 .7 Cnts >70 .6 ISO >4 17 ISO >6 12 ISO >14 7 NAS 1638 8 IR Water W ater K.Fish Chemistry 0 Barium Calcium Magnesium Molybdenum Phosphorus Zinc OilLife Idx Chemical Idx 0.0 Dielectric DV Visc 40C DV Visc %Chng IR Oxidation Visc 40C Visc 100C Visc Idx Total Acid Total Base Wear Contamination Chemistry High Fault Low Fault Alert Low Alert Normal Shermco Industries 33022 FM 2004 Angleton, Texas (800)-219-9038 G.Sellers@Shermco.com Ref Oil No Reference Oil 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100PPM by VolumeParticle size, microns (c) Particle Count in PPM by Volume PPM by Volume PC Total Vol = 0.13 ppm Spectrometer Size Range0.04 0.01 0.08 6 14 ISO 17/12/7 System Debris = 1.56 ml PC Vol <6u = 0.04 ppm PC Vol 6-14u = 0.01 ppm PC Vol >14u = 0.08 ppm Oil Capacity = 11,871.05 liters ____________________________ ____________________________ O bse rva tions O il is in good condition O il is fit for furthe r use A ctions C ontinue norm a l sa m pling S a m ple da ta ok. P a rticle s w ithin lim its. N o a ction re quire d. C ontinue to m onitor a t norm a l sa m pling sche dule . OilView 3/23/2015 Page 1 Descriptions of Tests Test Decal Color Codes and Service Classifications After a piece of electrical equipment or device is tested and/or calibrated by Shermco Industries, Inc. a Calibration/Test decal is attached to that particular device. An explanation of the decal color code and service classification is as follows: White Decal All Tests Satisfactory When a device passes all tests satisfactorily and has met the requirements of the NETA testing specifications, then a white decal is attached to the device. This indicates that the device is electrically and mechanically sound and acceptable for return to service. There may be some minor deficiencies with the equipment, but none that effect the equipment electrically or mechanically to any large degree. Examples of deficiencies could be: evidence of slight corrosion, incorrect circuit ID, nameplate missing, etc. Yellow Decal Limited Service If the device under test has a minor problem that is not detrimental to the protective operation or major design characteristics of that particular device, then a yellow “Limited Service” decal is attached to the device. Examples of limited service classifications could be: indicating trip targets that don’t function properly, slightly lower than acceptable insulation resistance readings, chipped arc chute, etc. Red Decal Non-Serviceable If the device under test has a problem that is detrimental to the proper electrical or mechanical operation of that device, then a red “Non-Serviceable” decal is attached to the device. The non- serviceable decal would be attached to the device after attempts at field repair were made. Examples of non-serviceable classifications could be: no trip on one or more phases, low insulation resistance readings, mechanical trip problems, high contact resistance readings, etc. Digital Low Resistance Ohmmeter Testing The Digital Low Resistance Ohmmeter (DLRO or “Ducter”) is an instrument that accurately measures very small values of resistance. The DLRO will normally give an indication in the micro-ohm range. The DLRO is used to determine the resistance of the load current path through a conductor, such as the contacts of a closed switch or circuit breaker. The DLRO operates on the four-wire measurement principle, thus eliminating lead and contact resistances. With basic accuracies of ±0.25% and resolution down to 0.1 μΩ., they are designed to be rugged and portable for use at the job site. The needs for accurate low resistance measurement are well known and very diverse. They range from receiving and inspection of components to ground bonding and welded joints. Applications include, but are not limited to, making dc resistance measurements for: • Switch and breaker contact resistance • Busbar and cable joints • Integrity of welded joints • Intercell strap connections on battery systems up to 600 V peak • Transformer and motor winding resistance • Graphite electrodes and other composites • Wire and cable resistance High resistance readings are an indication of a defective or problem current path on the device under test. This can be due to poor contact surface, insufficient contact spring tension, loose series trip unit, or other faulty devices in the current carrying portion of the device. A high micro-ohm reading indicates the presence of a problem that, if not corrected, could lead to excessive heat. This heat in some cases can be sufficient to cause tripping of the breaker, which may contribute to unplanned shutdown of the equipment. The DLRO becomes very useful in identifying high resistance areas, which are difficult to find by any other means. Doble Insulation Power-Factor Testing The Doble test set is a device designed for testing electrical insulation in the field by measurements of dielectric-loss and current at a given applied voltage when connected to a commercial 120-volt 60-Hz source. The power factor of the test specimen in calculated from measurements of watts-loss and current. The test set has a maximum capacity of 200 milliamperes. It is suitable for testing bushings, potheads, insulators, circuit breakers, lightning arresters, insulating oils and askarels (PCB’s), instrument transformers, power transformers of all sizes, and cables in lengths up to approximately 1000 feet. While the Doble test is loosely referred to as a power-factor test, it is implicit that all pertinent electrical parameters are taken into account in the analyses of the results. The AC parameters include: total current; dielectric- loss; power factor; capacitance; and resistance. The underlying principle of the Doble test is to measure these fundamental AC electrical characteristics of the insulation. The measurements are made at normal power-system frequency (as a result, the tests tend to simulate the manner in which voltage is normally distributed throughout complex non-homogeneous insulation systems of apparatus), applying test potentials that are low to moderate relative to the inherent voltage breakdown strength of the insulation system. The tests are then analyzed by various means, which include: • Comparing the results against a manufacturer’s factory data. • Comparing the results against known data for other similar units. • Observing changes in benchmark test results over time. Degradation of insulation will produce, to varying degrees, changes in one or more of the measurable electrical parameters; measuring and analyzing these fundamental characteristics provide a convenient, searching, and effective means for safely detecting defective insulation of high-voltage equipment in the field. The AC dielectric-loss and power-factor test is a proven and effective nondestructive method, which can reveal the presence of faulty insulation, even when such faulty insulation is surrounded by good insulation. Insulation Resistance Testing In the insulation resistance test of insulation, an applied voltage from 100 to 10,000 volts, supplied from a source of constant potential, is applied to the device under test. The usual potential source is an insulation resistance test set (commonly referred to as a Megger), either hand or power operated, which indicates the insulation resistance directly on a scale calibrated in megohms. The quality of the insulation is evaluated based on the level of the insulation resistance. The insulation resistance of many types of insulation is quite variable with temperature, so the data obtained should be corrected to the standard temperature for the class of equipment under test. Some published charts are available for this purpose. The megohm value and insulation resistance obtained will be inversely proportional to the volume of insulation being tested. As an example, a cable 1000 feet long would be expected to have one-tenth the insulation resistance of a cable 100 feet long, if all other conditions are identical. Insulation resistance tests are typically performed on motors, circuit breakers, transformers, low- voltage (unshielded) cables, switchboards, and panel boards to determine if degradation due to aging, environmental, or other factors has affected the integrity of the insulation. This test is normally conducted for 1 min, and the insulation resistance value is then recorded. The electrical properties of the insulation and the amount of surface area directly affect the capacitance between the conductor and ground, and therefore affect the charging time. With larger motors, generators, and transformers, a common test is to measure the “Dielectric Absorption Ratio” (DAR) or the “Polarization Index” (PI) of the piece of equipment being tested. The dielectric absorption ratio is the 1-minute insulation resistance reading divided by the 30- second insulation resistance reading. The polarization index is the 10-minute (continuous) insulation resistance reading divided by the 1-minute reading. Page 2 Both of these provide additional information as to the quality of the insulation. Many types of insulation become dry and brittle as they age, thereby becoming less effective capacitors. Thus, a low polarization index (less than 2.0) may indicate poor insulation. Even though insulation may have a high insulation resistance reading, there could still be a problem, since the motor and transformer windings are subjected to strong mechanical stresses on starting. With the exception of electronic equipment (which can be damaged by testing), insulation resistance testing is normally done on most types of new equipment and is also part of a maintenance program. It is a good practice to perform insulation resistance testing on switchgear and panelboards after maintenance has been performed on them, just prior to re-energizing them. This prevents re-energizing the equipment with safety grounds still applied or with tools accidentally left inside. (Above information is from IEEE Yellow Book; 902-1998) Oil Tests and Their Significance Physical Tests ASTM Method Number 1. Aniline Point D611-82 (1998) 2. Color D1500-98 3. Flash and Fire Points D92-98a 4. Interfacial Tension D971-99 D2285-99 5. Pour Point D97-96a 6. Relative Density (Specific Gravity) D1298-85 (1990) 7. Viscosity D88-94 D445-97 D2161-93 Electrical Tests ASTM Method Number 1. Dielectric Breakdown Voltage D877-87 (1995) D1816-97 2. Dielectric Breakdown Impulse Voltage D3300-94 3. Dissipation Factor (Power Factor) D924-92 4. Gassing of Insulating Oils Under D2300-98 Electrical Stress and Ionization Chemical Tests ASTM Method Number 1. Gas Content D2945-90 (1998) D3284-99 D3612-96 2. Polychlorinated Biphenyls D4059-96 3. Corrosive Sulfur D1275-96a 4. Neutralization Number (Acidity) D664-95 D974-97 5. Oxidation Inhibitor Content D2668-96 D4768-96 6. Oxidation Stability (Inhibited oil only, D2112-95 (BOMB) Oxidation Stability) D2440-99 7. Water in Insulating Liquids D1533-96 8. Furans in Insulating Liquids D5837-95 Page 2 Description Of Physical Tests Aniline Point -ASTM D611-82- (1998) The aniline point (temperature) of a mineral insulating oil indicates the solvency of the oil for some materials that are in contact with the oil. A high aniline point indicates a lower degree of aromaticity and a lower solvency for some material (rubber, for example). Color - ASTM D1500-98 Insulating oil should have a light color and be optically clear so that it permits visual inspection of the assembled apparatus inside the equipment tank. Any change in the color of an oil over time is an indication of deterioration or contamination of the oil. Flash and Fire Points - ASTM D92-98a The flash point of an oil is the temperature to which the material must be heated (under prescribed conditions of test) in order to give off sufficient vapor to form a flammable mixture with air. The fire point is the temperature that provides sufficient oil vapors to ignite and sustain a fire for 3 seconds (under the same test conditions). A low flash point indicates the presence of volatile combustible contaminants in the insulating oil. Interfacial Tension - ASTM D971-99a, ASTM D2285-99 This method covers the measurement, under nonequilibrium conditions, of the surface tension that an insulating fluid maintains against water. Interfacial tension is a measurement of the forces of attraction between molecules of the two fluids. It is expressed in millinewtons per meter (mN/m). The test is an excellent means of detecting oil-soluble polar contaminants and oxidation products in insulating oils. Pour Point - ASTM D97-96a The pour point is the temperature at which oil ceases to flow under prescribed testing conditions. The pour point has little significance as a test for contamination or deterioration of the oil. It may be useful for oil identification and determination of suitability for a particular climate. Page 3 Relative Density (Specific Gravity) - ASTM D1298-85 The relative density of an oil is the ratio of the weights of equal volumes of the oil and water, tested at 15 °C. The relative density is significant in determining the suitability for use in certain applications, in cold climates, ice may form in equipment exposed to temperatures below freezing. When considered along with other oil properties, relative density can be an indicator of the quality of the oil. Viscosity - ASTM D88-94, ASTM D445-97, ASTM D2161-93 (1999) The viscosity of an insulating oil is measured by timing the flow of a known volume of oil through a calibrated tube. Viscosity is not significantly affected by oil contamination or deterioration, but may be useful for identifying certain types of service-aged insulating oils. Viscosity has an important influence on the heat transfer characteristics of an oil. High viscosity decreases the cooling efficiency of the oil. High viscosity will also affect the movement of parts in electrical equipment, such as circuit breakers, switchgear, tap changers, pumps, and regulators. Viscosity is a factor in determining the conditions for oil processing and cellulose impregnation time. Visual Examination - ASTM D1524-94 (1999) This test indicates the color and degree of turbidity of an oil, which may indicate the presence of free water or contaminating solid particles. The source of insoluble solid contaminants may be determined by filtrating the particles and examining them. This test may be used to suggest the need for additional laboratory tests, as it may permit a determination of whether the sample should be sent to a central laboratory for a full evaluation. Page 4 Description Of Electrical Tests Dielectric Breakdown Voltage - ASTM D877-87 (1995), ASTM D1816-97 The dielectric breakdown voltage of insulating oil is a measure of its ability to withstand voltage stress without failure. It is the voltage at which breakdown occurs between two electrodes under prescribed test conditions. The test serves primarily to indicate the presence of electrically conductive contaminants in the oil, such as water, dirt, moist cellulosic fibers, or particulate matter. A high dielectric breakdown voltage does not indicate the absence of all contaminants, however. The electrodes in D877 are thin flat disks, which are not representative of the electrodes in transformers. Although the rounded electrodes in D1816 do not duplicate the characteristics of insulated electrodes in transformers, they more closely approximate transformer applications. However, the D1816 electrodes are more responsive to particles and dissolved water in oil, both of which are detrimental to the electrical strength of oil in transformers. Therefore, D1816 test results furnish a better evaluation of changes that may occur in the oil from transformers. Two methods are recognized for measuring the dielectric breakdown voltage of insulating oils: 1. ASTM D877-87 (1995) is recommended for the routine acceptance of new, unprocessed oil from a supplier for use in circuit breakers. This test method uses thin flat-faced cylindrical electrodes with a 2.5 mm gap. The sensitivity of this method, to the general population of contaminates present in a liquid sample, decreases as applied test voltages used in this method become greater than 25 kV rms. 2. ASTM D1816-97 is recommended for testing fluid that is being processed into transformers or contained in transformers and load tap changers. This method uses spherically shaped electrodes. The fluid sample is circulated continuously in the test cell throughout the test. The gap distance standard settings are 1 mm and 2 mm (alt. 0.04 in and 0.08 in). Dielectric Breakdown Impulse Voltage - ASTM D3300-94 This test method is most commonly performed using a negative polarity point opposing a grounded sphere (NPS). The NPS breakdown voltage of fresh unused oils measured in the highly divergent field in this configuration depends on oil composition; decreasing with increasing concentration of aromatic, particularly polyaromatic, hydrocarbon molecules. This test method may be used to evaluate the continuity of composition of oil from shipment to shipment. The NPS impulse breakdown voltage of oil can also be substantially lowered by Page 5 contact with materials of construction, by service aging, and by other impurities. Test results lower than those expected for a given fresh oil may also indicate use or contamination of that oil. Although polarity of the voltage wave has little or no effect on the breakdown strength of oil in uniform fields, polarity does have a marked effect on the breakdown voltage of oil in non- uniform electric fields. Transient voltages may also vary over a wide range in both the time to reach crest value and the time to decay to half crest or to zero magnitude. The IEEE standard lightning impulse test specifies a 1.2 by 50-us negative polarity wave. Dissipation Factor (Power Factor) - ASTM D924-92 The dissipation factor is a measure of the power lost when an electrical insulating liquid is subjected to an ac field. The power is dissipated as heat within the fluid. A low-value dissipation factor means that the fluid will cause little of the applied power to be lost. The test is used as a check on the deterioration and contamination of an insulating oil because of its sensitivity to ionic contaminants. Gassing of Insulating Oils Under Electrical Stress and Ionization - ASTM D2300-98 This test measures whether insulating oils are gas absorbing or gas evolving when subjected to electrical voltage. For certain applications, when insulating oils are stressed at high voltage gradients, it is desirable to know the rate at which gas is absorbed or evolved from the oil. The absorption or evolution of gas by a liquid under electrical stress is a function of the aromatic character of the liquid molecules. Liquids that are significantly aromatic in character will absorb gas as they are electrically stressed. Liquids that have little or no aromatic character will evolve hydrogen gas upon application of an electrical voltage. At the present time, however, correlation of these test results with equipment performance is limited. Numerical results obtained in different laboratories or by using two different procedures may differ significantly in magnitude, and the results of this method should be considered qualitative in nature. Page 6 Description Of Chemical Tests Gas Content ASTM D2945-90 (1998), ASTM D3284-99, ASTM D3612-96 The gas content of an insulating fluid may be defined as the volume of dissolved gas per 100 volumes of oil, at standard pressure and temperature. Some types of equipment require the use of electrical insulating liquids of low gas content. In filling electrical apparatus, a low gas content reduces foaming and also reduces the available oxygen, thereby increasing the service life of the insulating oil. The amount and kind of gases dissolved in oil can be used as a tool to aid in detecting and diagnosing faults and abnormal operating conditions in equipment. The test is not intended for use in purchase specifications because the oil is customarily degassed immediately prior to use. The test can be used, however, as a factory control test and is more useful in evaluating the health of the transformer equipment. Overheating or arcing within the transformer will generate combustible and noncombustible gasses that will be dissolved in the oil. For Dissolved Gas Analysis, reference IEEE C57.104-1991 for further recommendations. Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) - ASTM D4059-96 United States regulations require that electrical apparatus and electrical insulating fluids containing PCBs be handled and disposed of through the use of specific procedures. The procedure to be used for a particular apparatus or quantity of insulating fluid is determined by the PCB content of the fluid. The results of this analytical technique can be useful in selecting the appropriate handling and disposal procedures, refer to Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 761. Corrosive Sulfur-ASTM D1275-96a This test is designed to detect the presence of free sulfur and combined corrosive sulfur by how the liquid affects polished copper strips in prescribed conditions. The test indicates the possibility of corrosion inside of electrical equipment resulting from the presence of sulfur- containing compounds. The source of sulfur present in insulating oil is usually the crude oil from which it is refined. The sulfur may come from rubber hoses used for oil processing or from replacement gasket materials. Page 7 Neutralization Number (Acidity) - ASTM D664-95, ASTM D974-97 The neutralization number of an electrical insulating liquid is a measure of the acidic components of that material. In a new oil, any acid present is likely residual from the refining process. In a service-aged liquid, the neutralization number is a measure of the acidic byproducts of the oxidation of an oil. The neutralization number may be used as a general guide for determining when an oil should be reprocessed or replaced. ASTM D974-97 is the traditional color-change indicator method of titrating the acids with a mild (0.1 N) KOH solution. ASTM D664-95 is a potentiometric titration method. On some service-aged liquids, the color may be so dark as to impair the ability of the technician to determine the indicator color change in ASTM D974-97, so ASTM D664-95 is used instead. The correlation between these two methods, however, has not been established. Oxidation Inhibitor Content - ASTM D2668-96 by infrared spectrophotometry, ASTM D4768-96 by gas chromatography There are two synthetic oxidation inhibitors commonly used in dielectric fluids. They are 2-6 ditertiary-butyl phenol (DBP) and 2-6 ditertiary-butyl para-cresol (DBPC). Their use provides added resistance to oxidation in systems that are partially or wholly exposed to air. The effectiveness of the oxidation inhibitor depends a great deal on the type of crude oil from which the insulating oil came. Certain new oils may contain naturally occurring antioxidant substances that may yield a false-positive indication in this test. Oxidation Stability, Inhibited only, (BOMB) - ASTM D2112-95, ASTM D2440-97 This method is a rapid test for evaluating the oxidation stability of a new mineral insulating oil that contains the synthetic oxidation inhibitor 2-6 DBPC or 2-6 DBP. The test measures the length of time required for the oil sample to react with a given volume of oxygen when a sample of oil is heated and oxidized under test conditions. Oxidation Stability - ASTM D2440-99. This test method determines the resistance of mineral insulating oils to oxidation under prescribed accelerated aging conditions. Oxidation stability is measured by the propensity of oils to form sludge and acid products during oxidation. This test method is applicable to new oils, both inhibited and uninhibited. Water in Insulating Liquids: Karl Fischer Method - ASTM D1533-96 Page 8 Water may be present in insulating liquids in several forms. The presence of free water may be indicated by visual examination. The oil will appear cloudy or separated water drops will be seen, probably on the bottom surface. The presence of free water can be remedied by filtration or other means. Dissolved water cannot be detected visually and is normally quantified by physical or chemical means. Dissolved water may affect the dielectric breakdown of an insulating oil, however, its significance is determined by several factors including the percent of moisture saturation, and the amount and type of contaminates. The method cited is suitable for the determination of water in insulating oil, and, depending upon conditions of sample handling and methods of analysis, can be used to estimate total water as well as dissolved water in insulating oil. The units of measure of water are mg/Kg (parts per million) (ppm). New insulating oil received from the manufacturer normally contains less than 25mg/kg (ppm) moisture. New insulating oil should be tested for moisture content. If necessary, applicable measures should be taken to avoid introducing high moisture-content oil into electrical equipment. Furans in Insulating Liquids - ASTM D5837-95 Furanic compounds are generated by the degradation of cellulosic materials used in the solid insulation systems of electrical equipment. Furanic compounds which are oil soluble to an appreciable degree will migrate into the insulating liquid. The presence of high concentrations of furanic compounds is significant in that this may be an indication of cellulose degradation from aging or incipient fault conditions. Testing for furanic compounds by High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) may be used to complement dissolved gas in oil analysis as performed in accordance with ASTM D3612-90 test method. PCB General Information What are polychlorinated biphenyls? For a century, PCBs were known mostly to engineers and chemists as the acronym for a variety of chemicals used in many manufacturing products. PCBs, or polychlorinated biphenyls, were considered chemically and thermally stable, meaning they did not break down easily. Nor did they easily catch fire. These physical properties made PCBs extremely desirable for a wide variety of industrial applications. PCBs don't burn easily and are good insulating material. They have been used widely as coolants and lubricants in transformers, capacitors, and other electrical equipment. The manufacture of PCBs stopped in the United States in 1977. What are They? PCBs belong to a class of organic chemicals known as chlorinated hydrocarbons. For 50 years, the manufacture, sale, use and discharge of PCBs were legal in the United States. More than one billion pounds of PCBs were produced and sold. PCBs were considered a “miracle” chemical because they would not burn and were widely used in electrical equipment installed in wooden factories and school buildings where fire was a constant threat. In fact, some city codes and some insurance companies required the use of PCB-type transformers and capacitors. PCB Chemistry PCBs are a family of compounds produced commercially by directly chlorinating biphenyl. Many different combinations are possible. In chemical terminology, "phenyl" denotes a ring structure of six carbon atoms attached to something else; "biphenyl" results when two such rings are attached to each other. And polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) is any molecule having multiple chlorine atoms attached to the carbon atoms of a biphenyl nucleus. Chlorine atoms can be placed at any or all of ten available sites, with 209 PCB mixtures theoretically possible. Page 2 PCBs were manufactured and sold as complex mixtures differing in their average chlorination level. The 209 possible PCB compounds are referred to as "congeners." PCB congeners with the same number of chlorine atoms are known as "homologs" or "isomers" of each other. The materials now collectively referred to as PCBs are actually several dozen individual PCB congeners clustered around some average degree of chlorination. Congeners may be grouped in terms of the number of chlorine atoms attached to the biphenyl molecule. For instance, one chlorine would produce a mono-chlorobiphenyl, two a di- chlorobiphenyl, ten a deca-chlorobiphenyl. Any biphenyl moecule with two or more chlorines is commonly referred to as a poly-chlorinated biphenyl. Are There Risks? PCBs have been regulated by the federal government as a "probable human carcinogen" based on studies of rats that were fed large doses of PCBs over their entire lives. But after nearly 20 years of research on human beings exposed to PCBs, there is no credible evidence that PCB exposure causes disease in people. Their Physical Properties The physical properties of PCBs vary among the different homologs. Lower-chlorinated PCBs (the mono-, di-, tri- and tetra-chlorinated PCBs) tend to be light, oily fluids. Penta- chlorobiphenyls are heavy, honey-like oils. The most highly chlorinated PCBs are greases and waxy substances. In general, PCBs are non-flammable and water-insoluble. They have high boiling points and low electrical conductivity. They are chemically and thermally stable. These physical properties made PCBs extremely desirable for a wide variety of industrial applications, including dielectric Page 3 heat transfer fluids, hydraulic fluids, solvent extenders, flame retardants, organic diluents, dielectric fluids, inks, dyes, paints and adhesives. For example, PCBs were found in carbonless copy paper, newsprint and caulking compounds. Who Made and Used PCBs? PCBs were manufactured in the United States by the Swann Chemical Co., beginning in 1929. Monsanto Industrial Chemicals Co. purchased Swann in 1935 and continued producing PCBs until the mid-1970s. More than one billion pounds of PCBs were produced and sold. Estimates for the cumulative total of U.S. industrial uses of PCBs from 1930 to 1975 are offered below: Use Industrial PCB Purchases (in Millions of Pounds) Capacitors 630 Transformers 335 Plasticizers 115 Hydraulics and Lubricants 80 Carbonless copy paper 45 Misc. Industrial 28 Heat transfer 20 In 1970, reacting to concerns over PCB accumulations in the environment, Monsanto began voluntarily restricting its sale of PCBs to those customers that were manufacturers of sealed electrical equipment only. In 1976, Congress passed the Toxic Substances Control Act, to be implemented by 1979, that banned the manufacture of PCBs and PCB-containing products and established strict regulations regarding their future use and sale. National PCB phase-outs similar to the U.S. ban took place in Japan, Canada and Sweden, but many other industrial nations, including the United Kingdom, Germany, France and Spain, continued to permit PCB production and the manufacture of PCB-filled capacitors and transformers into the 1980s. The Kimbrough Study In the largest-ever human study of its kind, researchers Renate D. Kimbrough, M.D., and Martha L. Doemland, PhD., have found no association between actual human exposure to Page 4 PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) and deaths from cancer or any other diseases. For more than 20 years, the federal government has characterized PCBs as probable human carcinogens based in part on Dr. Kimbrough’s 1975 study of PCBs in rats that were fed large quantities of PCBs in their diets. "This new study provides strong evidence that even long-term human exposure to PCBs at higher levels than are found in the environment is not related to an increase in deaths from cancer or any other diseases," said Dr. Kimbrough, the study’s principal investigator and a senior medical associate with the non-profit Institute for Evaluating Health Risks in Washington, D.C. The findings of this study are consistent with those of four other studies of workers in the same factories conducted by other researchers over nearly 25 years, but the new study is the largest and most statistically powerful study ever conducted of humans exposed to PCBs. The mortality study focused on the 7,075 men and women who worked between 1946 and 1977 in two Upstate New York factories that used PCBs in the manufacture of electrical capacitors. The study compared to national and regional averages the number and causes of death, adjusted for age and gender, for the 1,195 members of the study population who died. The average follow-up time for the 7,075 workers was 31 years, providing a sufficiently long latency period in which to determine whether there was any increase in cancer mortality. Some of the workers in the study had PCB levels in their blood as high as several thousand parts per billion. In the United States, the average PCB levels found in the blood of people who have been tested range from 4 to 8 parts per billion (ppb), according to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Federal and State Regulations That Apply to PCB Wastes Federal Regulations: Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) The EPA regulates PCBs through five statutes, the most comprehensive of which is the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976. The regulations resulting from TSCA are codified in 40 Page 5 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 761. These regulations govern the use, marking, storage, recording, and disposal of PCBs and PCB wastes. These regulations: prohibit the manufacture of PCBs, unless the manufacture is specifically exempted by the EPA; prohibit the processing, distribution, and use of PCBs, except in a totally enclosed manner; and require that all wastes containing 50 parts per million (ppm) or greater PCB content must be disposed of at a TSCA-approved disposal facility. State Regulations In addition to the federal regulations governing PCB wastes, Texas also has regulations governing such wastes. Depending upon their source and their hazardous waste status, PCB wastes generated in Texas are subject to regulation by either the Railroad Commission of Texas (RRC) or the TNRCC. Regulations Applying to PCB Wastes That Are Hazardous Wastes or Are Produced by Industrial Generators. The TNRCC has jurisdiction over all hazardous wastes and wastes produced by generators of “industrial solid waste” (which is defined in 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Section 335.1 (Definitions) as, “. . . waste resulting from or incidental to any process of industry or manufacturing, or mining or agricultural operation, which may include hazardous waste . . .”). TNRCC regulations that apply to both hazardous and industrial wastes are found in 30 TAC Chapter 335. At present, PCBs are not themselves defined as hazardous wastes. Wastes containing PCBs can be a hazardous waste only if they: (1) Are mixed with a listed hazardous waste or are derived from a listed hazardous waste (in which case the resulting mixture is a listed hazardous waste); or (2) Exhibit one or more characteristics of a hazardous waste. Assigning Waste Codes to Hazardous Wastes and Industrial Wastes That Contain PCBs. Before any hazardous waste or industrial waste containing PCBs can be disposed of, it must be assigned an eight-character waste code number that consists of (1) a four-character sequence number, (2) (2) a three-character form code, and (3) (3) a one-character classification code. Where can I get more information? Page 6 Contact Shermco at 972.793.5523 for regulatory support, outsourced guidance, and recommendiations. Transformer Turns Ratio Testing Transformer Turns Ratio (TTR) tests are used to determine the ratio of the transformer windings. The instrument is a null balance type of the portable hand crank equipment. Ten position switches will indicate the transformer ratio. The actual ratio value is normally indicated to three decimal places. The voltage across the primary of a transformer is directly proportional to the voltage across the secondary, multiplied by the ratio of primary winding turns to secondary winding turns. In order to ensure that the transformer was wound properly when it was new, and to help locate subsequent turn-to-turn faults in the winding, it is common practice to perform a TTR test. The simplest method would be to energize one primary winding with a known voltage (that is less than or equal to the winding’s rating) and measure the voltage on the other winding. Since source test voltages can fluctuate, it is often more accurate to use a test set, designed for this purpose, that creates the test voltage internally, thus giving a direct read-out of the ratio measured. This test is also used to locate faults in tap changer circuits or internal coil connections. It can also identify short circuited or bypassed turns. (Above information is from IEEE Yellow Book; 902-1998) 36 Appendix 3: 42-inch Pipeline Plans 37 Appendix 4: GHA Laying Plans 38 Appendix 5: OPCC Short-Term Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Client: City of Coppell Date: 2/14/2018 Project:North Lake Raw Water Delivery System Prepared By:TRH KHA No.:64124028 Checked By:MAS Title: Raw Water System INTERIM IMPROVEMENTS - ROM (0% Design) Sheet: 1 of 4 Item No. Item Description Item Cost 1 Site Work $300,000 2 Access Points $340,000 3 Outfall Demo - Channel Armor $280,000 Subtotal $920,000 Contingency 25%$230,000 GCs, Bonds, Ins., OH 15%$138,000 $1,288,000 Basis for Cost Projection:Profit 12%$155,000 No Design Completed $1,443,000 Preliminary Design Engineering, Surveying, Geotech 15%$217,000 Final Design TOTAL $1,660,000 This total does not reflect land acquisition, environmental nor permitting costs. This construction cost opinion adopts the classification of estimates as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE). The capital costs within this project definition report are defined as order-of-magnitude-level (Class 4) estimate as defined in the AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97, Cost Estimate Classification System. An estimate of this type is normally expected to be within +50 percent or –30 percent of the actual construction cost. The final cost of the projects will depend on actual labor and materials costs, actual site conditions, productivity, competitive market conditions, bid dates, seasonal fluctuations, final project scope, final project schedule, and other variables. As a result, the final project costs will vary from the estimates presented in this report. \\dalfp02\data\Project\DAL_Municipal\064124028 - NorthLakeRawWater\4 - Preliminary Report\OPCC\20180214_OPCC_0% NorthLake RawWater - Interim Improvements.xlsx Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc.Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Client: City of Coppell Date: 2/14/2018 Project:North Lake Raw Water Delivery System Prepared By:TRH KHA No.:64124028 Checked By:MAS Title: Site Work Sheet: 2 of 4 Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 1 PS Clean/Excavate Intake Channel and Adjoining Bank 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000 2 PS Rip Rock Intake Channel and Adjoining Bank 800 CY $63.00 $50,400 3 Temp Access Ramp 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000 4 42" x 10" Tap 1 EA $15,000.00 $15,000 5 Grapevine Cr Crossing Stabilization (Gabion wall and revetment)2 LS $85,000.00 $170,000 Basis for Cost Projection:Subtotal:$295,400 Conting. (%,+/-) 0% Total:$300,000 This total does not reflect engineering, technical services, or land acquisition. This construction cost opinion adopts the classification of estimates as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE). The capital costs within this project definition report are defined as order-of-magnitude-level (Class 4) estimate as defined in the AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97, Cost Estimate Classification System. An estimate of this type is normally expected to be within +50 percent or –30 percent of the actual construction cost. The final cost of the projects will depend on actual labor and materials costs, actual site conditions, productivity, competitive market conditions, bid dates, seasonal fluctuations, final project scope, final project schedule, and other variables. As a result, the final project costs will vary from the estimates presented in this report. No Design Preliminary Design Final Design \\dalfp02\data\Project\DAL_Municipal\064124028 - NorthLakeRawWater\4 - Preliminary Report\OPCC\20180214_OPCC_0% NorthLake RawWater - Interim Improvements.xlsx Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc.Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Client: City of Coppell Date: 2/14/2018 Project:North Lake Raw Water Delivery System Prepared By:TRH KHA No.:64124028 Checked By:MAS Title: Access Points Sheet: 3 of 4 Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 1 20" HDPE DR17 - pipe matl NIC LF $45.00 2 20" HDPE DR17 - install NIC LF $35.00 3 Annular grout NIC CY $125.00 4 Access Point Site Prep 4 EA $15,000.00 $60,000 Remove single joint, replace with shop fab tee, butt straps 4 EA $35,000.00 $140,000 5 CARV W/ MH 4 EA $25,000.00 $100,000 6 LO POINT BLOWOFF W/MH NIC EA $12,000.00 7 Site Clear, Grub, and Preparation (60-FT WIDE CONSTR ESMNT) 4 EA $5,000.00 $20,000 8 SEED/SOD RESTORATION NIC SY $0.50 9 Erosion Control 4 EA $2,500.00 $10,000 10 SWPPP 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000 Basis for Cost Projection:Subtotal:$335,000 Conting. (%,+/-) 0% Total:$340,000 This total does not reflect engineering, technical services, or land acquisition. This construction cost opinion adopts the classification of estimates as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE). The capital costs within this project definition report are defined as order-of-magnitude-level (Class 4) estimate as defined in the AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97, Cost Estimate Classification System. An estimate of this type is normally expected to be within +50 percent or –30 percent of the actual construction cost. The final cost of the projects will depend on actual labor and materials costs, actual site conditions, productivity, competitive market conditions, bid dates, seasonal fluctuations, final project scope, final project schedule, and other variables. As a result, the final project costs will vary from the estimates presented in this report. No Design Preliminary Design Final Design \\dalfp02\data\Project\DAL_Municipal\064124028 - NorthLakeRawWater\4 - Preliminary Report\OPCC\20180214_OPCC_0% NorthLake RawWater - Interim Improvements.xlsx Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc.Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Client: City of Coppell Date: 2/14/2018 Project:North Lake Raw Water Delivery System Prepared By:TRH KHA No.:64124028 Checked By:MAS Title: Outfall Demo - Channel Armor Sheet: 4 of 4 Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost RAW WATER OUTFALL STRUCTURE 1 Demo Ex. Outfall Sill Wall 1 EA $15,000.00 $15,000 2 Demo Ex. Outfall Projecting Headwalls above rock line 2 EA $15,000.00 $30,000 3 Demo Ex. Outfall Deck and Bridge Structure 1 EA $25,000.00 $25,000 4 Soft Armor Outfall Channel (800-LF x 20-ft W 9" Gabion Mattress) 1,778 SY $95.00 $168,889 5 8' CLF w/ Man Gate Access Control 200 LF $50.00 $10,000 6 Landscape/Slope Armor Restoiration 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000 7 Erosion Control 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000 8 SWPPP 1 LS $6,000.00 $6,000 Basis for Cost Projection:Subtotal:$279,889 Conting. (%,+/-) 0% Total:$280,000 This total does not reflect engineering, technical services, or land acquisition. This construction cost opinion adopts the classification of estimates as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE). The capital costs within this project definition report are defined as order-of-magnitude-level (Class 4) estimate as defined in the AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97, Cost Estimate Classification System. An estimate of this type is normally expected to be within +50 percent or –30 percent of the actual construction cost. The final cost of the projects will depend on actual labor and materials costs, actual site conditions, productivity, competitive market conditions, bid dates, seasonal fluctuations, final project scope, final project schedule, and other variables. As a result, the final project costs will vary from the estimates presented in this report. No Design Preliminary Design Final Design \\dalfp02\data\Project\DAL_Municipal\064124028 - NorthLakeRawWater\4 - Preliminary Report\OPCC\20180214_OPCC_0% NorthLake RawWater - Interim Improvements.xlsx 39 Appendix 6: OPCC Long-Term Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Client: City of Coppell Date: 2/14/2018 Project:North Lake Raw Water Delivery System Prepared By:TRH KHA No.:64124028 Checked By:MAS Title: Raw Water Delivery System Conversion - ROM (0% Design) Sheet: 1 of 7 Item No. Item Description Item Cost 1 Site Work $590,000 2 Pump Station Piping and Equipment $930,000 3 Force Main (installed in existing 42" host pipe)$1,630,000 4 Electrical and Instrumentation (per J. Kotrla, PE)$560,000 5 Structural $270,000 Subtotal $3,980,000 Contingency 25%$995,000 GCs, Bonds, Ins., OH 15%$597,000 $5,572,000 Basis for Cost Projection:Profit 12%$669,000 No Design Completed $6,241,000 Preliminary Design Engineering, Surveying, Geotech 15%$937,000 Final Design TOTAL $7,178,000 This total does not reflect land acquisition, environmental nor permitting costs. This construction cost opinion adopts the classification of estimates as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE). The capital costs within this project definition report are defined as order-of-magnitude-level (Class 4) estimate as defined in the AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97, Cost Estimate Classification System. An estimate of this type is normally expected to be within +50 percent or –30 percent of the actual construction cost. The final cost of the projects will depend on actual labor and materials costs, actual site conditions, productivity, competitive market conditions, bid dates, seasonal fluctuations, final project scope, final project schedule, and other variables. As a result, the final project costs will vary from the estimates presented in this report. \\dalfp02\data\Project\DAL_Municipal\064124028 - NorthLakeRawWater\4 - Preliminary Report\OPCC\20171227_OPCC_0% NorthLake RawWater.xlsx Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc.Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Client: City of Coppell Date: 2/14/2018 Project:North Lake Raw Water Delivery System Prepared By:TRH KHA No.:64124028 Checked By:MAS Title: Site Work Sheet: 2 of 7 Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost RAW WATER PUMP STATION 1 Dredge (Mech) Intake 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 2 Deveg, Clean and Rock Dress Intake Channel and Adjoinging Bank 1 LS $100,000.00 $100,000 3 Bollards 16 EA $600.00 $9,600 4 7" Concrete Pavement 1,000 SY $96.00 $96,000 5 HMAC Pavement 1,067 SY $65.00 $69,333 5 Site Clear, Grub, and Preparation 2 AC $6,960.00 $13,920 6 Cut and Fill 500 CY $10.00 $5,000 7 Fine Grading 1 LS $30,000.00 $30,000 8 Export Spoils Off Site (Max 2 miles)400 CY $15.00 $6,000 RAW WATER OUTFALL STRUCTURE 1 Soft Armor Outfall Channel (800-LF x 20-ft W 9" Gabion Mattress) 1,778 SY $95.00 $168,889 2 8' CLF w/ Man Gate Access Control 200 LF $50.00 $10,000 3 Landscape/Slope Armor Restoiration 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000 4 Erosion Control 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000 5 SWPPP 1 LS $6,000.00 $6,000 Basis for Cost Projection:Subtotal:$589,742 Conting. (%,+/-) 0% Total:$590,000 This total does not reflect engineering, technical services, or land acquisition. This construction cost opinion adopts the classification of estimates as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE). The capital costs within this project definition report are defined as order-of-magnitude-level (Class 4) estimate as defined in the AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97, Cost Estimate Classification System. An estimate of this type is normally expected to be within +50 percent or –30 percent of the actual construction cost. The final cost of the projects will depend on actual labor and materials costs, actual site conditions, productivity, competitive market conditions, bid dates, seasonal fluctuations, final project scope, final project schedule, and other variables. As a result, the final project costs will vary from the estimates presented in this report. No Design Preliminary Design Final Design \\dalfp02\data\Project\DAL_Municipal\064124028 - NorthLakeRawWater\4 - Preliminary Report\OPCC\20171227_OPCC_0% NorthLake RawWater.xlsx Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc.Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Client: City of Coppell Date: 2/14/2018 Project:North Lake Raw Water Delivery System Prepared By:TRH KHA No.:64124028 Checked By:MAS Title: Pump Station Mech Conversion Sheet: 3 of 7 Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost A 3500-GPM, 150 HP VTP Pump (FOB Site)2 EA $85,000.00 $170,000 Installation Mech 35% % $59,500 Other Electrical & Instrumentation (20%)25% % $42,500 $272,000 B 3500-GPM, 150 HP Submerisble Pump (w/ rails, base elbow, brackets)2 EA $55,000.00 $110,000 Installation Mech 25% % $27,500 Other Electrical & Instrumentation (20%)25% % $27,500 $165,000 C Stop Logs (14 logs; 120" x 12")14 EA $3,200.00 $44,800 Lifting Mechanism 1 EA $3,500.00 $3,500 Portabel Gantry Crane (10'-0" clr span, 8'-0" min hk ht) 1 EA $10,000.00 $10,000 2-ton Winch, 30-ft lift 2 EA $12,000.00 $24,000 Bar Screen Rebuild (pick screens, pressure wash, sand blast, replace heavily corroded bars)2 EA $25,000.00 $50,000 $132,300 SELECTIVE DEMO (incl salvage of ex. Equip value) 1 LS $100,000.00 $100,000 1 Meter Vault (6 x 8)1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000 2 Grout 50 CY $3.00 $150 3 1" Air Release/Vacuum Valve 3 EA $1,000.00 $3,000 4 8" Ductile Iron Surge Relief Piping 50 LF $250.00 $12,500 5 8" Flanged Coupling Adapter 2 EA $1,200.00 $2,400 6 8" Gate Valve 2 EA $4,000.00 $8,000 7 8" Surge Relief Valve 1 EA $25,000.00 $25,000 9 8" Swing Check Valve 3 EA $9,500.00 $28,500 11 8" Ductile Iron Discharge Piping 80 LF $230.00 $18,400 12 8" Electromagnetic Flow Meter 1 EA $25,000.00 $25,000 13 18" Gate Valve 1 EA $12,500.00 $12,500 14 20" HDPE Discharge Piping 200 LF $200.00 $40,000 16 Pipe Supports 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000 17 Link Seal Wall Penetrations 5 EA $1,500.00 $7,500 21 48" x 48" Bilco SS Type JD-SS Hatch 4 EA $10,000.00 $40,000 22 48" X 54" Bilco Aluminum Type JD-AL Hatch 0 EA $5,000.00 $0 Basis for Cost Projection:Subtotal:$927,250 Conting. (%,+/-) 0% $0 Total:$930,000 This total does not reflect engineering, technical services, or land acquisition. This construction cost opinion adopts the classification of estimates as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE). The capital costs within this project definition report are defined as order-of-magnitude-level (Class 4) estimate as defined in the AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97, Cost Estimate Classification System. An estimate of this type is normally expected to be within +50 percent or –30 percent of the actual construction cost. The final cost of the projects will depend on actual labor and materials costs, actual site conditions, productivity, competitive market conditions, bid dates, seasonal fluctuations, final project scope, final project schedule, and other variables. As a result, the final project costs will vary from the estimates presented in this report. OR No Design Preliminary Design Final Design \\dalfp02\data\Project\DAL_Municipal\064124028 - NorthLakeRawWater\4 - Preliminary Report\OPCC\20171227_OPCC_0% NorthLake RawWater.xlsx Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc.Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Client: City of Coppell Date: 2/14/2018 Project:North Lake Raw Water Delivery System Prepared By:TRH KHA No.:64124028 Checked By:MAS Title: Force Main (installed in existing 42" host pipe)Sheet: 4 of 7 Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 1 20" HDPE DR17 - pipe matl 12,200 LF $45.00 $549,000 2 20" HDPE DR17 - install 12,200 LF $35.00 $427,000 3 Annular grout 3,362 CY $125.00 $420,192 4 Pull Pits - Access Points 6 EA $15,000.00 $90,000 5 CARV W/ MH 4 EA $15,000.00 $60,000 6 LO POINT BLOWOFF W/MH 2 EA $12,000.00 $24,000 7 Site Clear, Grub, and Preparation (60-FT WIDE CONSTR ESMNT) 2 AC $5,000.00 $10,000 8 SEED/SOD RESTORATION 9,680 SY $0.50 $4,840 9 Erosion Control 2 MI $15,000.00 $30,000 10 SWPPP 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000 $1,625,032 Basis for Cost Projection:Subtotal:$1,625,032 Conting. (%,+/-) 0% Total:$1,630,000 This total does not reflect engineering, technical services, or land acquisition. This construction cost opinion adopts the classification of estimates as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE). The capital costs within this project definition report are defined as order-of-magnitude-level (Class 4) estimate as defined in the AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97, Cost Estimate Classification System. An estimate of this type is normally expected to be within +50 percent or –30 percent of the actual construction cost. The final cost of the projects will depend on actual labor and materials costs, actual site conditions, productivity, competitive market conditions, bid dates, seasonal fluctuations, final project scope, final project schedule, and other variables. As a result, the final project costs will vary from the estimates presented in this report. No Design Preliminary Design Final Design \\dalfp02\data\Project\DAL_Municipal\064124028 - NorthLakeRawWater\4 - Preliminary Report\OPCC\20171227_OPCC_0% NorthLake RawWater.xlsx Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc.Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Client: City of Coppell Date: 2/14/2018 Project:North Lake Raw Water Delivery System Prepared By:TRH KHA No.:64124028 Checked By:MAS Title: Architectural Sheet: 5 of 7 Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 1 Stairs 0 LS $35,000.00 $0 2 Wet Well/Dry Pit Waterproofing 0 LS $20,000.00 $0 3 Metal Grating 0 SF $30.00 $0 4 Electrical Building 0 LS $60,000.00 $0 Basis for Cost Projection:Subtotal:$0 Conting. (%,+/-) 0 Total:$0 This total does not reflect engineering, technical services, or land acquisition. This construction cost opinion adopts the classification of estimates as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE). The capital costs within this project definition report are defined as order-of-magnitude-level (Class 4) estimate as defined in the AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97, Cost Estimate Classification System. An estimate of this type is normally expected to be within +50 percent or –30 percent of the actual construction cost. The final cost of the projects will depend on actual labor and materials costs, actual site conditions, productivity, competitive market conditions, bid dates, seasonal fluctuations, final project scope, final project schedule, and other variables. As a result, the final project costs will vary from the estimates presented in this report. No Design Preliminary Design Final Design \\dalfp02\data\Project\DAL_Municipal\064124028 - NorthLakeRawWater\4 - Preliminary Report\OPCC\20171227_OPCC_0% NorthLake RawWater.xlsx Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc.Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Client: City of Coppell Date: 2/14/2018 Project:North Lake Raw Water Delivery System Prepared By:TRH KHA No.:64124028 Checked By:MAS Title:Electrical and Instrumentation (per J. Kotrla, PE)Sheet: 6 of 7 Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 1 MCC and Power House 1 LS $57,500.00 $57,500 2 Conduit and Wire 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 3 480 volt service from Sandy Lake Rd to Pump Station 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000 4 Grounding 1 LS $7,500.00 $7,500 5 Lightning and surge Protection 1 LS $7,500.00 $7,500 6 Lighting and misc.1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000 7 Instrumentation and controls 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000 North Lake Intake Pump Station SCADA 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Cypress Waters Raw Water Pump Staton SCADA 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Oncor Pad Mounted Switch 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Oncor 3-Phase Extension (OHE from McInnish Park)1 LS $125,000.00 $125,000 Basis for Cost Projection:Subtotal:$447,500 Conting. (%,+/-) 25% $111,875 Total:$560,000 This total does not reflect engineering, technical services, or land acquisition. This construction cost opinion adopts the classification of estimates as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE). The capital costs within this project definition report are defined as order-of-magnitude-level (Class 4) estimate as defined in the AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97, Cost Estimate Classification System. An estimate of this type is normally expected to be within +50 percent or –30 percent of the actual construction cost. The final cost of the projects will depend on actual labor and materials costs, actual site conditions, productivity, competitive market conditions, bid dates, seasonal fluctuations, final project scope, final project schedule, and other variables. As a result, the final project costs will vary from the estimates presented in this report. ONCOR Allowance Elecrical SCADA No Design Preliminary Design Final Design \\dalfp02\data\Project\DAL_Municipal\064124028 - NorthLakeRawWater\4 - Preliminary Report\OPCC\20171227_OPCC_0% NorthLake RawWater.xlsx Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc.Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Client: City of Coppell Date: 2/14/2018 Project:North Lake Raw Water Delivery System Prepared By:TRH KHA No.:64124028 Checked By:MAS Title: Structural Sheet: 7 of 7 Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost RAW WATER PUMP STATION 1 Demo Ex. Pump Pads; Pour New Hatch Opennings 2 EA $15,000.00 $30,000 2 New 4x4 AL Hatches 2 EA $12,000.00 $24,000 3 Demo Ex. Wall Penetrations - Pour new wall sleeves 2 EA $7,500.00 $15,000 4 Valve Vault 1 LS $45,000.00 $45,000 5 Selective Crack Injection 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000 6 Selective Patching 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000 RAW WATER OUTFALL STRUCTURE 1 Demo Ex. Outfall Sill Wall 1 EA $15,000.00 $15,000 2 Demo Ex. Outfall Projecting Headwalls above rock line 2 EA $15,000.00 $30,000 3 Demo Ex. Outfall Deck and Bridge Structure 1 EA $25,000.00 $25,000 4 Valve Vault 1 LS $45,000.00 $45,000 5 Selective Crack Injection 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000 6 Selective Patching 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000 Basis for Cost Projection:Subtotal:$269,000 Conting. (%,+/-) 0% Total:$270,000 This total does not reflect engineering, technical services, or land acquisition. This construction cost opinion adopts the classification of estimates as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE). The capital costs within this project definition report are defined as order-of-magnitude-level (Class 4) estimate as defined in the AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97, Cost Estimate Classification System. An estimate of this type is normally expected to be within +50 percent or –30 percent of the actual construction cost. The final cost of the projects will depend on actual labor and materials costs, actual site conditions, productivity, competitive market conditions, bid dates, seasonal fluctuations, final project scope, final project schedule, and other variables. As a result, the final project costs will vary from the estimates presented in this report. No Design Preliminary Design Final Design \\dalfp02\data\Project\DAL_Municipal\064124028 - NorthLakeRawWater\4 - Preliminary Report\OPCC\20171227_OPCC_0% NorthLake RawWater.xlsx 40 Appendix 7: On-Call Pumping Services Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Client: City of Coppell Date: 2/14/2018 Project:North Lake Raw Water Delivery System Prepared By:TRH KHA No.:64124028 Checked By:MAS Title: Interim Improvements - ROM (0% Design)Sheet: 1 of 3 Item No. Item Description Item Cost 1 Pump Station Intake/Pump Platform/Pipeline Connection Site Work $160,000 2 On-Call Pumping (Annual Services Contract Estimate)$90,000 Subtotal Construciton $160,000 Contingency 25%$40,000 GCs, Bonds, Ins., OH 15%$24,000 $224,000 Basis for Cost Projection:Profit 12%$27,000 No Design Completed $251,000 Preliminary Design Engineering, Surveying, Geotech 15%$38,000 Final Design TOTAL $289,000 This total does not reflect land acquisition, environmental nor permitting costs. This construction cost opinion adopts the classification of estimates as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE). The capital costs within this project definition report are defined as order-of-magnitude-level (Class 4) estimate as defined in the AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97, Cost Estimate Classification System. An estimate of this type is normally expected to be within +50 percent or –30 percent of the actual construction cost. The final cost of the projects will depend on actual labor and materials costs, actual site conditions, productivity, competitive market conditions, bid dates, seasonal fluctuations, final project scope, final project schedule, and other variables. As a result, the final project costs will vary from the estimates presented in this report. \\dalfp02\data\Project\DAL_Municipal\064124028 - NorthLakeRawWater\4 - Preliminary Report\OPCC\20180214_OPCC_0% NorthLake RawWater - Temp Pumping.xlsx Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc.Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Client: City of Coppell Date: 2/14/2018 Project:North Lake Raw Water Delivery System Prepared By:TRH KHA No.:64124028 Checked By:MAS Title: Pump Station Intake/Pump Platform/Pipeline Connection Site Work Sheet: 2 of 3 Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 1 Clean/Excavate Intake Channel and Adjoining Bank 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000 2 Rip Rock Intake Channel and Adjoinging Bank 800 CY $63.00 $50,400 3 Temp Access Ramp 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000 4 42" x 10" Tap 1 EA $40,000.00 $40,000 Basis for Cost Projection:Subtotal:$150,400 Conting. (%,+/-) 0% Total:$160,000 This total does not reflect engineering, technical services, or land acquisition. This construction cost opinion adopts the classification of estimates as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering No Design Preliminary Design Final Design \\dalfp02\data\Project\DAL_Municipal\064124028 - NorthLakeRawWater\4 - Preliminary Report\OPCC\20180214_OPCC_0% NorthLake RawWater - Temp Pumping.xlsx Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc.Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Client: City of Coppell Date: 2/14/2018 Project:North Lake Raw Water Delivery System Prepared By:TRH KHA No.:64124028 Checked By:MAS Title: On Call Pumping Services Sheet: 3 of 3 Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost 1 Bypass Pumping Setup 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000 2 Maintenance 1 MO $1,000.00 $1,000 3 Pump Rental/Control 3 MO $7,500.00 $22,500 4 Fuel (1200-ACFT @ 5-mgd @ 8-gal_fuel/hr @ $4/gal_fuel)15,014 GAL $4.00 $60,057 Basis for Cost Projection:Subtotal:$88,557 Conting. (%,+/-) 0% Total:$90,000 This total does not reflect engineering, technical services, or land acquisition. This construction cost opinion adopts the classification of estimates as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering No Design Preliminary Design Final Design \\dalfp02\data\Project\DAL_Municipal\064124028 - NorthLakeRawWater\4 - Preliminary Report\OPCC\20180214_OPCC_0% NorthLake RawWater - Temp Pumping.xlsx Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3840 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3840 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: Parks and Recreation 03/09/2018File Created: Final Action: Camp Standards of CareFile Name: Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of an Ordinance of the City of Coppell, Texas, readopting, ratifying, republishing and extending Chapter 9 of the Code of Ordinances, Article 9-19, Youth Camp Programs Standards of Care; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 12. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Memo.pdf, Standards of Care 2018.pdf, Ordinance.pdfAttachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 1 Brad Reid 1 3/23/20183/22/2018 Approve 1 Christel Pettinos - FYI 2 3/22/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3840 Title PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of an Ordinance of the City of Coppell, Texas, readopting, ratifying, Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3840) republishing and extending Chapter 9 of the Code of Ordinances, Article 9-19, Youth Camp Programs Standards of Care; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Summary See attached memo. Fiscal Impact: [Enter Fiscal Impact Statement Here] Staff Recommendation: The Parks and Recreation Department recommends approval. Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Business Prosperity Community Wellness and Enrichment Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Brad Reid, Director of Parks and Recreation Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Consider approval of an ordinance of the City of Coppell, Texas, readopting, ratifying, republishing and extending Chapter 9 of the Code of Ordinances, Article 9-19, Youth Camp Programs Standards of Care; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. 2030: Sustainable Government - Excellent City Services with high level of Customer Satisfaction, Financial Resources to Support City Services, Community Wellness and Enrichment - Recreation Programs and Services for all Generations. Introduction: This item is submitted annually to the City Council so that guidelines for state exemption of day care licensing can be applied for all youth camp programs offered by the Parks and Recreation Department. These camps include Camp Do-It-All, KidzConnect, Missoula, and all those offered at the Recreation Center in the summer and any individual holiday camps that are scheduled throughout the school year. Analysis: The youth camps offered by the City of Coppell are exempt from licensure as observed in the Texas Administrative Code Title 40 Chapter 745.115(3) of the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS). This is applicable because our programs are operated by a municipality, are recreation programs for children ages 5 through 13, and because they meet the following criteria: • The Standards of Care for the program are annually adopted by ordinance. • The Standards of Care include staffing ratios and qualifications, facility health and safety standards, and monitoring and enforcement provisions. The Standards of Care are provided to the parents of each program participant. • The Standards of Care are provided to the parents of each program participant. • The parents of each program participant are informed that the program is not licensed by the state. • The program is not advertised as child care. 2 As parents register their children for Coppell camps they are provided a copy of the Standards of Care, as listed in the requirements. Along with the standards they are also provided information on camp hours of operation, rules, attire, activities and field trips, and all other information parents need for camp to be successful for their child. These Standards of Care are closely monitored by the Recreation Coordinator, Recreation Center Manager and the Assistant Director of Recreation. Legal Review: Agenda item was reviewed by the city’s legal counsel. Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact attached to this agenda. Recommendation: The Parks and Recreation Department recommends approval. CITY OF COPPELL YOUTH CAMP PROGRAMS STANDARDS OF CARE The Standards of Care are intended to be minimum standards by which the City of Coppell Parks & Recreation Department will operate the City's Youth Camp Programs. The programs operated by the City are recreational in nature and are not day care programs. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION Organization A. The governing body of the City of Coppell Youth Camp Programs is the Coppell City Council. B. City of Coppell Youth Camp Programs are exempt from the Department of TEXAS state Health Department licensure under state law. C. Implementation of the Youth Programs Standards of Care is the responsibility of the Parks & Recreation Department Director and Departmental employees. D. Youth Program ("Program") to which these Standards of Care will apply is the Summer Recreation Program and selected days off from the school calendar. E. Each Youth Program site will have available for public and staff review a current copy of the Standards of Care. F. Parents of participants will be provided a current copy of the Standards of Care during the registration process. G. Criminal background checks will be conducted on prospective Youth Program employees. If results of the criminal check indicate that an applicant has been convicted of any of the following offenses, he or she will not be considered for employment: (1) A felony or a misdemeanor classified as an offense against a person or family; (2) A felony or misdemeanor classified as public indecency; (3) A felony or misdemeanor violation of any law intended to control the possession or distribution of any controlled substance; (4) Any offense involving moral turpitude; (5) Any offense that would potentially put youth participants or the City of Coppell at risk. Definitions A. City: City of Coppell B. City Council: City Council of the City of Coppell C. Department: Parks & Recreation Department of The City of Coppell D. Youth Programs or Program: City of Coppell Youth Programs currently consisting of the Summer Recreation Program and selected days off from school. E. Program Manual: Notebook of policies, procedures, required forms, and organizational and programming information relevant to Coppell Youth Programs. F. Director: City of Coppell Parks & Recreation Department Director or his or her designee. G. Assistant Director of Recreation: City of Coppell Parks and Recreation Department’s Assistant Director of Recreation. H. Recreation Coordinator: City of Coppell Parks & Recreation Department Recreation Coordinator. I. Site Director: City of Coppell Parks & Recreation Department Seasonal/Temporary Programmer who has been assigned administrative responsibility for a Coppell Youth Program. J. Program Counselor: City of Coppell Parks & Recreation Department Seasonal/Temporary employee who has been assigned responsibility to implement the City's Youth Program. K. Program Site: Area and facilities where Coppell Youth Programs are held consisting of the Coppell Independent School District Campus and the Aquatic and Recreation Center. L. Participant: A youth whose parent(s) have completed all required registration procedures and determined to be eligible for a Coppell Youth Program. M. Parent(s): This term will be used to represent one or both parent(s) or adults who have legal custody and authority to enroll their child(ren) in Coppell Youth Programs. N. Employee(s): Term used to describe people who have been hired to work for the City of Coppell and have been assigned responsibility for managing, administering, or implementing some portion of the Coppell Youth Programs. O. Recreation Center: The Coppell Independent School District campuses or the Aquatics and Recreation Center which hosts the Summer Recreation Program and selected days off from school. P. Water Front Director: City of Coppell Parks & Recreation Department Aquatics Operation Supervisor or Head Lifeguard as assigned by the Recreation Manager. Inspections/Monitoring/Enforcement A. A monthly inspection report will be initiated by the Site Director of each Program to confirm that the Standards of Care are being met. B. The Assistant Director of Recreation will make visual inspections of the Program based on the following schedule: (1) Inspection reports will be sent to the Recreation coordinator for review and kept on record for at least two years. (2) The Recreation Coordinator will review the report and establish deadlines and criteria for compliance with the Standards of Care. C. The Summer Recreation Program will be inspected twice during its summer schedule. In addition, selected days at the Aquatics and Recreation Center will be visited during the school year. D. Complaints regarding enforcement of the Standards of Care will be directed to the Site Director. The Site Director will be responsible to take the necessary steps to resolve the problems. The Site Director will record complaints regarding enforcement of the Standards of Care and their resolution. The Recreation Coordinator will address serious complaints regarding enforcement of the Standards of Care and the complaint and resolution will be noted. E. The Parks & Recreation Department’s Director will make an annual report to the City Council on the overall status of the Youth Program and its operation relative to compliance with the adopted Standards of Care. Enrollment A. Before a child can be enrolled a parent must sign registration forms that contain the child's: (1) name, address, home telephone number; (2) name and address of parents and telephone number during Program hours; (3) the names and telephone numbers of people to whom the child can be released or names of those who may not pick them up; (4) a statement of the child's special problems or needs; (5) emergency medical authorization; (6) proof of residency when appropriate; and (7) a liability, transportation, photo and movie waiver Suspected Abuse Program employees will report suspected child abuse or neglect in accordance with the Texas Family Code. STAFFING - RESPONSIBILITIES AND TRAINING Site Director Qualifications A. Site Director will be Seasonal/Temporary professional employees of the City of Coppell Parks & Recreation Department and will be required to have all Recreation Site Director qualifications as outlined in this document. B. Site Director must be at least 21 years old C. Site Director must have a bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university. Acceptable degrees include: (1) Recreation Administration or General Recreation (2) Physical Education, Secondary or Elementary Education (3) Any other comparable degree plan that would lend itself to working in a public recreation environment D. Site Director must have two years experience planning and implementing recreational activities. E. Site Director must pass a background investigation including testing for illegal substances. F. Site Director must have successfully completed a course in First Aid and Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) based on either American Heart Association or American Red Cross standards. G. Site Director must be able to furnish proof of a clear tuberculosis test within 12 months prior to their employment date. Site Director's Responsibilities A. Site Directors are responsible to administer the Programs' daily operations in compliance with the adopted Standards of Care. B. Recreation Coordinator and Site Directors are responsible to recommend for hire, supervise, and evaluate Counselors. Camp management shall ascertain and have on record information, such as a letter of reference, attesting to the character and integrity of each staff member, and information, such as training certificates, attesting to the ability of each staff member to perform the tasks required in his or her position. C. Site Directors are responsible for planning, implementing, and evaluating programs. D. Site Directors will be considered Camp Health Officers. Duties will consist of, but not limited to: dispensing of medication and first aid, records management of incidences, emergencies, and camper’s health files. Counselor Qualifications A. Counselors will be Seasonal/Temporary employees of the Parks & Recreation Department. B. Counselors working with children must be age 17 or older and have completed high school; however, each site will have at least one employee 18 years old or older present at all times. C. Counselors should be able to consistently exhibit competency, good judgment, and self- control when working with children. D. Counselors must relate to children with courtesy, respect, tolerance, and patience. E. Counselors must have successfully completed a course in First Aid and CPR based on either American Heart Association or American Red Cross standards. An exception can be made for no more than one staff person at each site and that person shall successfully complete a First Aid and CPR course within two weeks of starting work. F. Each Counselor must be able to furnish proof of a clear tuberculosis test within the 12 months prior to their employment date. G. Counselors must pass a background investigation including testing for illegal substances. Counselor Responsibilities A. Counselors will be responsible to provide participants with an environment in which they can feel safe, can enjoy wholesome recreation activities, and can participate in appropriate social opportunities with their peers. B. Counselors will be responsible to know and follow all City, Departmental, and Program standards, policies and procedures that apply to Coppell Parks and Recreation Youth Programs. C. Counselors must ensure that participants are released only to an authorized parent or an authorized adult designated by the parent. All Program sites will have a copy of the Department approved plan to verify the identity of a person authorized to pick up a participant if that person is not known to the Counselor. Training/Orientation A. The Department is responsible for providing training and orientation to Program employees in working with children and for specific job responsibilities. Recreation Coordinator will provide each Counselor and Site Director with a Program Manual specific to the Youth Program. B. Program employees must be familiar with the Standards of Care for Youth Program operation as adopted by the City Council. C. Program employees must be familiar with the Program's policies including discipline, guidance, and release of participants as outlined in the Program Manual. D. Program employees will be trained in appropriate procedures to handle emergencies by the Recreation Coordinator and/or professionals in the field. E. Program employees will be trained in areas including City, Departmental, and Program policies and procedures, provision of recreation activities, safety issues, child psychology, and organization. F. Program employees will be required to sign an acknowledgement that they received the required training. OPERATIONS Staff-Participant Ratio A. In a Coppell Youth Program, the standard ratio of participants to Counselors shall not exceed 20 to 1. In the event a Counselor is unable to report to the Program site, a replacement will be assigned. The camp director shall not be included in the supervisor to camper ratio in camps serving over 50 campers at a time. B. Each participant shall have a Program employee who is responsible for him or her and who is aware of the participant's habits, interests, and any special problems as identified by the participant's parent(s) during the registration process. Discipline A. Program employees will implement discipline and guidance in a consistent manner based on the best interests of Program participants. B. There must be no cruel or harsh punishment or treatment. C. Program employees may use brief, supervised separation from the group if necessary. D. As necessary, Program employees will initiate discipline reports to the parent(s) of participants. Parents will be asked to sign discipline reports to indicate they have been advised about specific problems or incidents. E. A sufficient number and/or severe nature of discipline reports as detailed in the Program Manual may result in a participant being suspended from the Program. F. In instances where there is a danger to participants or staff, offending participants will be removed from the Program site as soon as possible. Programming A. Program employees will attempt to provide activities for each group according to the participants' ages, interests, and abilities. The activities must be appropriate to participants' health, safety, and well being. The activities also must be flexible and promote the participants' emotional, social, and mental growth. B. Program employees will attempt to provide indoor and outdoor time periods that include: (1) Alternating active and passive activities; (2) Opportunity for individual and group activities, and (3) Outdoor time each day weather permits. Communication A. The Program site will have a mobile phone to allow the site to be contacted by Parks & Recreation personnel or for making emergency calls. B. The Site Director will post the following telephone numbers adjacent to a mobile phone accessible to all Program employees at the site: (1) Coppell Ambulance or Emergency Medical Services; (2) Coppell Police Department; (3) Coppell Fire Department; (4) Coppell Independent School District campuses; (5) Numbers at which parents may be reached; (6) The telephone number for the site itself. Transportation A. Before a participant may be transported to and from city sponsored activities, a transportation form, completed by the parent of the participant, must be filed with the Site Director. B. First Aid supplies and a First Aid and emergency care guide will be available in all Program vehicles that transport children. C. All Program vehicles used for transporting participants must have available a 6-BC portable fire extinguisher which will be installed in the passenger compartment of the vehicle and must be accessible to the adult occupants. FACILITY STANDARDS Safety A. Program employees will inspect the Program site daily to detect sanitation and safety concerns that might affect the health and safety of the participants. A daily inspection report will be completed by Program employees and kept on file by the Site Director. B. Buildings, grounds, and equipment on the Program site will be inspected, cleaned, repaired, and maintained to protect the health of the participants. C. Program equipment and supplies must be safe for the participants' use. D. Program employees must have First Aid supplies readily available at each site, during transportation to an off-site activity, and for the duration of any off-site activity. E. Program air conditioners, electric fans, and heaters must be mounted out of participants' reach or have safeguards that keep participants from being injured. F. Program porches and platforms more than 30 inches above the ground must be equipped with railing participants can reach. G. All swing seats at the Program site must be constructed of durable, lightweight, relatively pliable material. H. Program employees must have First Aid supplies readily available to staff in a designated location. Program employees must have an immediately accessible guide to First Aid and emergency care. I. Restrooms will be inspected on a frequent basis to insure that no undesirable activity is occurring. Manual logs will be included with inspection reports indicated above to show that staff checks restrooms. Fire A. In case of fire, danger of fire, explosion, or other emergency, Program employees' first priority is to evacuate the participants to a designated safe area. B. The Program site will have an annual fire inspection by the local Coppell Fire Marshall, and the resulting report will detail any safety concerns observed. The report will be forwarded to the Director of Parks & Recreation who will review and establish deadlines and criteria for compliance. Information from this report will be included in the Director of Parks & Recreation annual report to the Council. C. The Program site must have at least one fire extinguisher approved by the Fire Marshall readily available to all Program employees. The fire extinguisher is to be inspected monthly by the Site Director, and a monthly report will be forwarded to the Recreation Manager who will keep the report on file for a minimum of two years. All Program employees will be trained in the proper use of fire extinguisher. D. Fire drills will be initiated at Program sites based on the following schedule: (1) Summer Recreation Program: A fire drill twice during the session. Health A. Illness or Injury (1) A participant who is considered to be a health or safety concern to other participants or employees will not be admitted to the Program. (2) Illnesses and injuries will be handled in a manner to protect the health of all participants and employees. (3) Program employees will follow plans to provide emergency care for injured participants with symptoms of an acute illness as specified in the Program manual. (4) Program employees will follow the recommendation of the Texas Department of Health concerning the admission or readmission of any participant after a communicable disease. B. Program employees will administer medication only if: (1) Parent(s) complete and sign a medication form that provides authorization for staff to dispense medication with details as to time and dosages. The form will include a hold harmless clause to protect the City. (2) Prescription medications are in the original containers labeled with the child's name, a date, directions, and the physician's name. Program employees will administer the medication only as stated on the label. Program employees will not administer medication after the expiration date. (3) Nonprescription medications are to be labeled with the child's name and the date the medication was brought to the Program. Nonprescription medication must be in the original container. Program employees will administer it only according to label direction. (4) Medication dispensed will be limited to routine oral ingestion not requiring special knowledge or skills on the part of Program employees. The Program employees will administer no injections. (5) Program employees must ensure medications are inaccessible to participants or, if it is necessary to keep medications in the refrigerator (when available), medications will be kept separate from food. C. Toilet Facilities (1) The Program site will have inside toilets located and equipped so children can use them independently and Program staff can supervise as needed. (2) There must be one flush toilet each for every 15 females and 15 males. Urinals may be counted in the ratio of toilets for males, but they must not exceed 70% of the total number of toilets. (3) An appropriate and adequate number of lavatories (sinks) will be provided. (4) Hand cleanser is required at all times. D. Sanitation (1) The Program facilities must have adequate light, ventilation, and heat. (2) The Program must have an adequate supply of water meeting the standards of the Texas Department of Health for drinking water and ensure that it will be supplied to the participants in a safe and sanitary manner. (3) Program employees must see that garbage is removed from buildings daily. E. Water Safety (1) An adult waterfront director shall be in charge of all waterfront activities. While waterfront activities are in progress, the waterfront director or an adult certified lifeguard assistant shall be in the immediate vicinity of the campers, supervising the program. (2) All campers’ swimming ability will be tested on their first fieldtrip to the pool. Children shall then be confined to the limits of swimming skills for which they have been classified. Page 1 TM 86270 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL ORDINANCE NO. ____________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, READOPTING, RATIFYING, REPUBLISHING AND EXTENDING CHAPTER 9 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, ARTICLE 9-19, YOUTH CAMP PROGRAMS STANDARDS OF CARE; PROVIDING A REPEALING CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Coppell operates Youth Camp programs; and WHEREAS, the City of Coppell has adopted and implemented a comprehensive standards of care to provide a safe and instructive atmosphere; and WHEREAS, the City of Coppell has previously passed and adopted youth camp programs standards of care and desires to re-adopt in accordance with state law; and WHEREAS, that state law requires each City to review and update its standards of care regulations for youth programs and hold the appropriate public hearing. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF COPPELL, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. That after Public Hearings Ordinance No. 2010-1248, as readopted and amended by Ordinance No. 2012-1306, Ordinance No. 2013-1338, Ordinance No. 2014-1375, Ordinance No. 2015-1411, Ordinance No. 2016-1432, Ordinance No. 2017- 1475 as codified in Chapter 9, Article 9-19 Youth Camp Program Standards of Care, Section 9-19-1 through Section 9-19-19 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Coppell, Texas, as amended, after public hearing, is hereby readopted ratified, republished and extended in its entirety from the date of its adoption and shall remain in effect through April 2019 unless otherwise repealed, amended or terminated as provided by state law. SECTION 2. That all provisions of any ordinance or the Code of Ordinances of the City of Coppell, Texas, except as provided herein, in conflict with the provisions of this Page 2 TM 86270 ordinance be, and the same are hereby, repealed, and all other provisions not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 3. That should any word, phrase, paragraph, or section of this ordinance or of the Code of Ordinances, as amended hereby, be held to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of this ordinance, in whole, in part or provision thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, and shall not affect the validity of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Coppell, Texas as a whole. SECTION 4. That this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage and publication, as the law and charter in such cases provide. DULY PASSED by the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas, this ___ day of _______________, 2018. APPROVED: By: KAREN SELBO HUNT, MAYOR ATTEST: By: CHRISTEL PETTINOS, CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: ROBERT E. HAGER, CITY ATTORNEY (REH/gd) Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3847 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3847 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: City Council 03/19/2018File Created: Final Action: Fire Station 4 Public HearingFile Name: Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of the location of a public safety building (fire station) on public owned property located at the intersection of Royal and North Point in the City of Coppell, Texas. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 13. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Memo - FS4 Public Hearing.pdfAttachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 1 Kevin Richardson 1 3/23/20183/22/2018 Approve 1 Jennifer Miller 2 3/23/20183/23/2018 Approve 1 Christel Pettinos - FYI 3 3/23/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3847 Title PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of the location of a public safety building (fire station) on public owned Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3847) property located at the intersection of Royal and North Point in the City of Coppell, Texas. Summary Fiscal Impact: [Enter Fiscal Impact Statement Here] Staff Recommendation: [Enter Staff Recommendation Here] Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Business Prosperity Community Wellness and Enrichment Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council Through: Mike Land, City Manager From: Noel Bernal, Deputy City Manager Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Public Hearing regarding the location of a public safety building (fire station) on publicly-owned property 2030: Sustainable City Government: Goal 3 “Excellent and Well-Maintained City Infrastructure and Facilities” Introduction: Presentation by Fire Department regarding proposed public safety building (fire Station #4) on publicly-owned property. Background: Analysis: Legal: Fiscal Impact: Recommendation: . Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3846 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3846 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: City Council 03/19/2018File Created: Final Action: ATMOS RRM Public HearingFile Name: Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Consider a Tariff authorizing an annual Rate Review Mechanism (“RRM”) as a substitution for the annual interim rate adjustment process defined by Section 104.301 of the Texas Utilities Code, and as negotiated between ATMOS Energy Corporation, Mid-Tex Division and the steering committee of cities served by ATMOS; requiring the company to reimburse cities’ reasonable ratemaking expenses. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 14. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Memo - Atmos RRM.pdf, ORDINANCE.pdf, Mid-Tex RRM Tariff.pdf, ATMOS RRM Exhibit A.pdf Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 1 Noel Bernal 1 3/22/20183/23/2018 Escalated 1 Christel Pettinos 2 3/26/20183/23/2018 Approve 1 Christel Pettinos - FYI 3 3/23/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3846 Title Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3846) PUBLIC HEARING: Consider a Tariff authorizing an annual Rate Review Mechanism (“RRM”) as a substitution for the annual interim rate adjustment process defined by Section 104.301 of the Texas Utilities Code, and as negotiated between ATMOS Energy Corporation, Mid-Tex Division and the steering committee of cities served by ATMOS; requiring the company to reimburse cities’ reasonable ratemaking expenses. Summary Fiscal Impact: [Enter Fiscal Impact Statement Here] Staff Recommendation: [Enter Staff Recommendation Here] Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Business Prosperity Community Wellness and Enrichment Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council Through: Mike Land, City Manager From: Noel Bernal, Deputy City Manager Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Consider a Tariff authorizing an annual Rate Review Mechanism (RRM) as a substitution for the annual interim rate adjustment process defined by Section 104.301 of the Texas Utilities Code, and as negotiated between Atmos Energy Corporation, Mid-Tex Division and the steering committee of cities served by Atmos; requiring the company to reimburse cities’ reasonable ratemaking expenses. 2030: Sustainable City Government: Goal 1 “Excellent City Services with High Level of Customer Satisfaction” Introduction: The Steering Committee of the Cities Served by Atmos Mid-Tex (ACSC) negotiated a new Rate Review Mechanism (RRM) for its member cities which will govern future annual rate filings by Atmos Energy Corporation, Mid-Tex Division. Background: The City, along with 171 other Mid-Texas Cities Served by Atmos Energy Corporation, Mid-Tex Division, is a member of the Steering Committee of Cities Served by Atmos (ACSC). In 2007, the ACSC and Atmos Mid-Tex settled a rate application filed by the Atmos pursuant to Section 104.301 of the Texas Utilities Code for an interim rate adjustment commonly referred to as a GRIP filing (arising out of the Gas Reliability Infrastructure Program Legislation). That settlement created a substitute rate review process, referred to as Rate Review Mechanism (RRM), as a substitute for future filings under the GRIP statute. ACSC strongly opposed the GRIP process and argued that it constitutes piecemeal ratemaking by ignoring declining expenses and increasing revenues and rewarding Atmos for increasing capital investment. In addition, the GRIP process does not allow any review of the reasonableness of capital investment and does not allow cities to participate in the Railroad Commission’s review of annual GRIP filings or the recovery of rate case expenses. Furthermore, the Railroad Commission undertakes a mere administrative review of GRIP filings (instead of a full hearing) and rate increases go into 2 effect without any material adjustments. In the ACSC’s view, the GRIP process unfairly raises customers’ rates without any regulatory oversight. In contrast, the RRM process has allowed for a more comprehensive rate review and annual evaluation of expenses and revenues, as well as capital investment. Since 2007, there have been several modifications to the original RRM Tariff. The Ordinance that resolved Atmos’ application under the RRM Tariff in 2017 also terminated the existing RRM Tariff and required renegotiation of the terms of that tariff. Negotiations have taken place over the past several months and have resulted in a revised RRM Tariff that has been agreed to by Atmos. The ACSC Executive Committee has recommended acceptance of the revised RRM Tariff, which is attached to the Ordinance. Analysis: The RRM Tariff on which the 2017 rates were based allowed a rate of return on equity of 10.50%. The revised RRM Tariff reduces that to 9.8%. The revised RRM Tariff also captures the reduction in federal income tax rates from 35% to 21% and should result in a rate reduction effective by mid- March 2018. Prior RRM tariffs allowed ACSC cities only three (3) months to review Atmos’ filings. The new revised Tariff expands that time period by two (2) months. New applications by Atmos should be made on or about April 1 of each year, with new rates effective October 1. A rate order from the Railroad Commission in an Atmos Texas Pipeline rate case adopted the position of ACSC with regard to incentive compensation related to Atmos’ Shared Services Unit that reduced allowable expenses, and that reduced level of expenses will be applicable under the new RRM Tariff. Legal: The City Attorney has reviewed and approved Ordinance. Fiscal Impact: None. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval. 1 ORDINANCE NO. ________________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, APPROVING A TARIFF AUTHORIZING AN ANNUAL RATE REVIEW MECHANISM (“RRM”) AS A SUBSTITUTION FOR THE ANNUAL INTERIM RATE ADJUSTMENT PROCESS DEFINED BY SECTION 104.301 OF THE TEXAS UTILITIES CODE, AND AS NEGOTIATED BETWEEN ATMOS ENERGY CORP., MID-TEX DIVISION (“ATMOS MID- TEX” OR “COMPANY”) AND THE STEERING COMMITTEE OF CITIES SERVED BY ATMOS; REQUIRING THE COMPANY TO REIMBURSE CITIES’ REASONABLE RATEMAKING EXPENSES; ADOPTING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; DETERMINING THAT THIS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT; DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND REQUIRING DELIVERY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO THE COMPANY AND LEGAL COUNSEL FOR THE STEERING COMMITTEE. WHEREAS, the City of Coppell, Texas (“City”) is a gas utility customer of Atmos Energy Corp., Mid-Tex Division (“Atmos Mid-Tex” or “Company”), and a regulatory authority with an interest in the rates and charges of Atmos Mid-Tex; and WHEREAS, the City and similarly-situated Mid-Tex municipalities created the Steering Committee of Cities Served by Atmos to efficiently address all rate and service matters associated with delivery of natural gas; and WHEREAS, the Steering Committee formed an Executive Committee to direct legal counsel and to recommend certain specific actions to all aligned Mid-Tex Cities through resolution or ordinance; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of a November 2007 agreement between the Steering Committee and Atmos Mid-Tex that settled the Company’s interim rate filing under Section 104.301 of the Texas Utilities Code (a “GRIP” rate case), the Steering Committee and the Company collaboratively developed a Rate Review Mechanism (“RRM”) Tariff, ultimately 2 authorized by the City in 2008, that allows for an expedited rate review process as a substitute for the GRIP process; and WHEREAS, the City has kept some form of a RRM Tariff in place until 2017 when it adopted an ordinance approving an RRM Tariff filing settlement and specifically calling for termination of the existing RRM Tariff and negotiation of a replacement RRM Tariff following the Railroad Commission’s decision in a then-pending Atmos Texas Pipeline case (GUD No. 10580); and WHEREAS, the Steering Committee’s Executive Committee has recently approved a settlement with the Company on the attached RRM Tariff that contains certain notable improvements, from a consumer perspective, over the prior RRM Tariff, including a reduced rate of return on equity, acceptance of certain expense adjustments made by the Railroad Commission in the Order in GUD No. 10580, and the addition of two months to the time for processing a RRM Tariff application; and WHEREAS, the RRM Tariff contemplates reimbursement of Cities’ reasonable expenses associated with RRM Tariff applications; and WHEREAS, the Steering Committee’s Executive Committee recommends that all Steering Committee member cities adopt this ordinance and the attached RRM Tariff; and WHEREAS, the attached RRM Tariff is just, reasonable and in the public interest, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS: Section 1. That the findings set forth in this Ordinance are hereby in all things approved. Section 2. That the attached RRM Tariff re-establishing a form of Rate Review Mechanism is just and reasonable and in the public interest, and is hereby adopted. 3 Section 3. That Atmos Mid-Tex shall reimburse the Cities’ reasonable expenses associated with adoption of this Ordinance and the attached RRM Tariff and in processing future RRM Tariff applications filed pursuant to the attached tariff. Section 4. That to the extent any resolution or ordinance previously adopted by the City is inconsistent with this Ordinance, it is hereby repealed. Section 5. That the meeting at which this Ordinance was approved was in all things conducted in strict compliance with the Texas Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code, Chapter 551. Section 6. That if any one or more sections or clauses of this Ordinance is adjudged to be unconstitutional or invalid, such judgment shall not affect, impair or invalidate the remaining provisions of this Ordinance , and the remaining provisions of this Ordinance shall be interpreted as if the offending section or clause never existed. Section 7. That this Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage. Section 8. That a copy of this Ordinance shall be sent to Atmos Mid-Tex, care of Chris Felan, Vice President of Rates and Regulatory Affairs, Atmos Energy Corporation, Mid-Tex Division, 5420 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1862, Dallas, Texas 75240, and to Geoffrey Gay, General Counsel to Mid-Tex Cities, at Lloyd Gosselink Rochelle & Townsend, P.C., 816 Congress Avenue, Suite 1900, Austin, Texas 78701. DULY PASSED this 27th day of March, 2018. 4 APPROVED: Karen Selbo Hunt, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: _______________________________ City Attorney City Secretary ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION MID-TEX DIVISION RATE SCHEDULE: RRM – Rate Review Mechanism APPLICABLE TO: ALL CITIES IN THE MID-TEX DIVISION AS IDENTIFIED IN EXHIBIT A TO THIS RATE SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE DATE:Bills Rendered on and after 04/01/2018 PAGE: 1 I. Applicability Applicable to Residential, Commercial, Industrial, and Transportation tariff customers within the city limits of cities identified in Exhibit A that receive service from the Mid-Tex Division of Atmos Energy Corporation (“Company”). This Rate Review Mechanism (“RRM”) provides for an annual adjustment to the Company’s Rate Schedules R, C, I and T (“Applicable Rate Schedules”). Rate calculations and adjustments required by this tariff shall be determined on a System-Wide cost basis. II. Definitions “Test Period” is defined as the twelve months ending December 31 of each preceding calendar year. The “Effective Date” is the date that adjustments required by this tariff are applied to customer bills. The annual Effective Date is October 1. Unless otherwise provided in this tariff the term Final Order refers to the final order issued by the Railroad Commission of Texas in GUD No. 10170 and elements of GUD No. 10580 as specified in Section III below. The term “System-Wide” means all incorporated and unincorporated areas served by the Company. “Review Period” is defined as the period from the Filing Date until the Effective Date. The “Filing Date” is as early as practicable, but no later than April 1 of each year. III. Calculation The RRM shall calculate an annual, System-Wide cost of service (“COS”) that will be used to adjust applicable rate schedules prospectively as of the Effective Date. The Company may request recovery of its total cost of service but will include schedules showing the computation of any adjustments. The annual cost of service will be calculated according to the following formula: COS = OM + DEP + RI + TAX + CD Where: OM = all reasonable and necessary operation and maintenance expenses from the Test Period adjusted for known and measurable items and prepared ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION MID-TEX DIVISION RATE SCHEDULE: RRM – Rate Review Mechanism APPLICABLE TO: ALL CITIES IN THE MID-TEX DIVISION AS IDENTIFIED IN EXHIBIT A TO THIS RATE SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE DATE:Bills Rendered on and after 04/01/2018 PAGE: 2 consistent with the rate making treatments approved in the Final Order. Incentive compensation (Management Incentive Plan, Variable Pay Plan and Long Term Incentive Plan) related to Atmos’ Shared Services Unit will be applied consistent with treatment approved in GUD 10580. Additionally, O&M adjustments will be incorporated and applied as modified by a final order, not subject to appeal, issued by the Railroad Commission of Texas in subsequent rate cases involving the Atmos Mid-Tex or West Texas divisions. Known and measurable adjustments shall be limited to those changes that have occurred prior to the Filing Date. OM may be adjusted for atypical and non-recurring items. Shared Services allocation factors shall be recalculated each year based on the latest component factors used during the Test Period, but the methodology used will be that approved in the Final Order in GUD 10580. DEP = depreciation expense calculated at depreciation rates approved by the Final Order. Additionally, if depreciation rates are approved in a subsequent final order, not subject to appeal, issued by the Railroad Commission of Texas for the Mid-Tex division those rates would be applicable for subsequent RRM filings. RI = return on prudently incurred investment calculated as the Company's pretax return multiplied by rate base at Test Period end. Rate base is prepared consistent with the rate making treatments approved in the Final Order, and as in GUD 10580 as specifically related to capitalized incentive compensation (Management Incentive Plan, Variable Pay Plan and Long Term Incentive Plan) for Atmos’ Shared Services Unit. However, no post Test Period adjustments will be permitted. Additionally, adjustments will be incorporated and applied as modified by a final order, not subject to appeal, issued by the Railroad Commission of Texas in subsequent rate cases involving the Atmos Mid-Tex or West Texas divisions. Pretax return is the Company's weighted average cost of capital before income taxes. The Company's weighted average cost of capital is calculated using the methodology from the Final Order including the Company's actual capital structure and long term cost of debt as of the Test Period end (adjusted for any known and measurable changes that have occurred prior to the filing date) and the return on equity of 9.8%. However, in no event will the percentage of equity exceed 58%. Regulatory adjustments due to prior regulatory rate base adjustment disallowances will be maintained. Cash working capital will be calculated using the lead/lag days approved in the Final Order. With respect to pension and other postemployment benefits, the Company will record a regulatory asset or liability for these costs until the amounts are included in the next annual rate adjustment implemented under this tariff. Each year, the Company’s filing under this Rider RRM will clearly state the level of pension ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION MID-TEX DIVISION RATE SCHEDULE: RRM – Rate Review Mechanism APPLICABLE TO: ALL CITIES IN THE MID-TEX DIVISION AS IDENTIFIED IN EXHIBIT A TO THIS RATE SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE DATE:Bills Rendered on and after 04/01/2018 PAGE: 3 and other postemployment benefits recovered in rates. TAX = income tax and taxes other than income tax from the Test Period adjusted for known and measurable changes occurring after the Test Period and before the Filing Date, and prepared consistent with the rate making treatments approved in the Final Order. Atmos Energy shall comprehensively account for, including establishing a regulatory liability to account for, any statutory change in tax expense that is applicable to months during the Test Period in the calculation to ensure recovery of tax expense under new and old income tax rates. CD = interest on customer deposits. IV. Annual Rate Adjustment The Company shall provide schedules and work papers supporting the Filing’s revenue deficiency/sufficiency calculations using the methodology accepted in the Final Order. The result shall be reflected in the proposed new rates to be established for the effective period. The Revenue Requirement will be apportioned to customer classes in the same manner that Company’s Revenue Requirement was apportioned in the Final Order. For the Residential Class, 50% of the increase may be recovered in the customer charge. However, the increase to the Residential customer charge shall not exceed $0.60 per month in the initial filing and $0.70 per month in any subsequent year. The remainder of the Residential Class increase not collected in the customer charge will be recovered in the usage charge. For all other classes, the change in rates will be apportioned between the customer charge and the usage charge, consistent with the Final Order. Test Period billing determinants shall be adjusted and normalized according to the methodology utilized in the Final Order. V. Filing The Company shall file schedules annually with the regulatory authority having original jurisdiction over the Company's rates on or before the Filing Date that support the proposed rate adjustments. The schedules shall be in the same general format as the cost of service model and relied-upon files upon which the Final Order was based. A proof of rates and a copy of current and proposed tariffs shall also be included with the filing. The filing shall be made in electronic form where practical. The Company’s filing shall conform to Minimum Filing Requirements (to be agreed upon by the parties), which will contain a minimum amount of information that will assist the regulatory authority in its review and analysis of the filing. The Company and regulatory authority will endeavor to hold a technical conference regarding the filing within twenty (20) calendar days after the Filing Date. ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION MID-TEX DIVISION RATE SCHEDULE: RRM – Rate Review Mechanism APPLICABLE TO: ALL CITIES IN THE MID-TEX DIVISION AS IDENTIFIED IN EXHIBIT A TO THIS RATE SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE DATE:Bills Rendered on and after 04/01/2018 PAGE: 4 A sworn statement shall be filed by an Officer of the Company affirming that the filed schedules are in compliance with the provisions of this Rate Review Mechanism and are true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge, information, and belief. No testimony shall be filed, but a brief narrative explanation shall be provided of any changes to corporate structure, accounting methodologies, allocation of common costs, or atypical or non- recurring items included in the filing. VI. Evaluation Procedures The regulatory authority having original jurisdiction over the Company's rates shall review and render a decision on the Company's proposed rate adjustment prior to the Effective Date. The Company shall provide all supplemental information requested to ensure an opportunity for adequate review by the relevant regulatory authority. The Company shall not unilaterally impose any limits upon the provision of supplemental information and such information shall be provided within seven (7) working days of the original request. The regulatory authority may propose any adjustments it determines to be required to bring the proposed rate adjustment into compliance with the provisions of this tariff. The regulatory authority may disallow any net plant investment that is not shown to be prudently incurred. Approval by the regulatory authority of net plant investment pursuant to the provisions of this tariff shall constitute a finding that such net plant investment was prudently incurred. Such finding of prudence shall not be subject to further review in a subsequent RRM or Statement of Intent filing. During the Review Period, the Company and the regulatory authority will work collaboratively and seek agreement on the level of rate adjustments. If, at the end of the Review Period, the Company and the regulatory authority have not reached agreement, the regulatory authority shall take action to modify or deny the proposed rate adjustments. The Company shall have the right to appeal the regulatory authority's action to the Railroad Commission of Texas. Upon the filing of an appeal of the regulatory authority's order relating to an annual RRM filing with the Railroad Commission of Texas, the regulatory authority having original jurisdiction over the Company's rates shall not oppose the implementation of the Company's proposed rates subject to refund, nor will the regulatory authority advocate for the imposition of a third party surety bond by the Company. Any refund shall be limited to and determined based on the resolution of the disputed adjustment(s) in a final, non-appealable order issued in the appeal filed by the Company at the Railroad Commission of Texas. ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION MID-TEX DIVISION RATE SCHEDULE: RRM – Rate Review Mechanism APPLICABLE TO: ALL CITIES IN THE MID-TEX DIVISION AS IDENTIFIED IN EXHIBIT A TO THIS RATE SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE DATE:Bills Rendered on and after 04/01/2018 PAGE: 5 In the event that the regulatory authority and Company agree to a rate adjustment(s) that is different from the adjustment(s) requested in the Company’s filing, the Company shall file compliance tariffs consistent with the agreement. No action on the part of the regulatory authority shall be required to allow the rate adjustment(s) to become effective on October 1. To the extent that the regulatory authority does not take action on the Company's RRM filing by September 30, the rates proposed in the Company's filing shall be deemed approved effective October 1. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, a regulatory authority may choose to take affirmative action to approve a rate adjustment under this tariff. In those instances where such approval cannot reasonably occur by September 30, the rates finally approved by the regulatory authority shall be deemed effective as of October 1. To defray the cost, if any, of regulatory authorities conducting a review of the Company's annual RRM filing, the Company shall reimburse the regulatory authorities on a monthly basis for their reasonable expenses incurred upon submission of invoices for such review. Any reimbursement contemplated hereunder shall be deemed a reasonable and necessary operating expense of the Company in the year in which the reimbursement is made. A regulatory authority seeking reimbursement under this provision shall submit its request for reimbursement to the Company no later than December 1 of the year in which the RRM filing is made and the Company shall reimburse regulatory authorities in accordance with this provision on or before December 31 of the year the RRM filing is made. To the extent possible, the provisions of the Final Order shall be applied by the regulatory authority in determining whether to approve or disapprove of Company’s proposed rate adjustment. This Rider RRM does not limit the legal rights and duties of a regulatory authority. Nothing herein shall abrogate the jurisdiction of the regulatory authority to initiate a rate proceeding at any time to review whether rates charged are just and reasonable. Similarly, the Company retains its right to utilize the provisions of Texas Utilities Code, Chapter 104, Subchapter C to request a change in rates. The provisions of this Rider RRM are implemented in harmony with the Gas Utility Regulatory Act (Texas Utilities Code, Chapters 101-105). The annual rate adjustment process set forth in this tariff shall remain in effect during the pendency of any Statement of Intent rate filing. ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION MID-TEX DIVISION RATE SCHEDULE: RRM – Rate Review Mechanism APPLICABLE TO: ALL CITIES IN THE MID-TEX DIVISION AS IDENTIFIED IN EXHIBIT A TO THIS RATE SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE DATE:Bills Rendered on and after 04/01/2018 PAGE: 6 VII. Reconsideration, Appeal and Unresolved Items Orders issued pursuant to this mechanism are ratemaking orders and shall be subject to appeal under Sections 102.001(b) and 103.021, et seq., of the Texas Utilities Code (Vernon 2007). VIII. Notice Notice of each annual RRM filing shall be provided by including the notice, in conspicuous form, in the bill of each directly affected customer no later than forty-five (45) days after the Company makes its annual filing pursuant to this tariff. The notice to customers shall include the following information: a) a description of the proposed revision of rates and schedules; b) the effect the proposed revision of rates is expected to have on the rates applicable to each customer class and on an average bill for each affected customer; c) the service area or areas in which the proposed rates would apply; d) the date the annual RRM filing was made with the regulatory authority; and e) the Company’s address, telephone number and website where information concerning the proposed rate adjustment can be obtained. ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION MID-TEX DIVISION RATE SCHEDULE: RRM – Rate Review Mechanism APPLICABLE TO: ALL CITIES IN THE MID-TEX DIVISION AS IDENTIFIED IN EXHIBIT A TO THIS RATE SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE DATE:Bills Rendered on and after 04/01/2018 PAGE: 7 Exhibit A ACSC Cities Abilene Cleburne Frost Lincoln Park Addison Clyde Gainesville Little Elm Albany College Station Garland Lorena Allen Colleyville Garrett Madisonville Alvarado Colorado City Grand Prairie Malakoff Angus Comanche Grapevine Mansfield Anna Commerce Groesbeck Mckinney Argyle Coolidge Gunter Melissa Arlington Coppell Haltom City Mesquite Aubrey Copperas Cove Harker Heights Midlothian Azle Corinth Haskell Murphy Bedford Crandall Haslet Newark Bellmead Crowley Hewitt Nocona Benbrook Dalworthington Gardens Highland Park North Richland Hills Beverly Hills Denison Highland Village Northlake Blossom Denton Honey Grove Oak Leaf Blue Ridge Desoto Hurst Ovilla Bowie Draper Hutto Palestine Boyd Duncanville Iowa Park Pantego Bridgeport Eastland Irving Paris Brownwood Edgecliff Village Justin Parker Buffalo Emory Kaufman Pecan Hill Burkburnett Ennis Keene Petrolia Burleson Euless Keller Plano Caddo Mills Everman Kemp Ponder Canton Fairview Kennedale Pottsboro Carrollton Farmers Branch Kerens Prosper Cedar Hill Farmersville Kerrville Quitman Celeste Fate Killeen Red Oak Celina Flower Mound Krum Reno (Parker County) Centerville Forest Hill Lake Worth Rhome Cisco Forney Lakeside Richardson Clarksville Fort Worth Lancaster Richland Frisco Lewisville Richland Hills ATMOS ENERGY CORPORATION MID-TEX DIVISION RATE SCHEDULE: RRM – Rate Review Mechanism APPLICABLE TO: ALL CITIES IN THE MID-TEX DIVISION AS IDENTIFIED IN EXHIBIT A TO THIS RATE SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE DATE:Bills Rendered on and after 04/01/2018 PAGE: 8 River Oaks Temple Roanoke Terrell Robinson The Colony Rockwall Trophy Club Roscoe Tyler Rowlett University Park Royse City Venus Sachse Vernon Saginaw Waco Sansom Park Watauga Seagoville Waxahachie Sherman Westlake Snyder Westover Hills Southlake Westworth Village Springtown White Settlement Stamford Whitesboro Stephenville Wichita Falls Sulphur Springs Woodway Sweetwater Wylie Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3798 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3798 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 2Version: Reference: In Control: Planning & Zoning Commission 02/07/2018File Created: Final Action: Sherrill AcresFile Name: Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of PD-293-LI, Sherrill Acres, a zoning change request from LI (Light Industrial) to PD-293-LI (Planned Development 293 -Light Industrial) to allow the subdivision of the property into two lots, allowing the retention of the existing office on Lot 2B1 and the approval of Concept Plan for Lot 2B2 for a future office building, containing 1.44 acres of property located at 1703 East Belt Line Road, at the request of Riverchase Realty LLC, being represented by Geoff Walker. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 15. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Cover Memo.pdf, Staff Report.pdf, Site Plan.pdf, Tree Survey.pdf, Landscape Plan.pdf Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 2 Mindi Hurley 1 3/21/20183/20/2018 Approve 2 Christel Pettinos - FYI 2 3/20/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 PassApproved02/15/2018Planning & Zoning Commission Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3798) Ms. Diamond introduced the case with exhibits. Ms. Diamond stated that staff is recommending approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Correct the landscape calculations to allow the determination of the specific variances being requested. 2. The following will be incorporated as PD Conditions: • Approval of a Detail Site Plan shall be required prior to the development Lot 2B2. • The hike and bike trail shall be constructed by the property owner/developer from the southern property line to Belt Line Road prior to the certificate of occupancy for the development on Lot 2B2 or within five years, whichever occurs first. • The occupants of the building on Lot 2B2 shall be permitted to advertise on the existing monument sign located on Lot 2B1. • The occupants of Lot 2B1 shall retain the right to use the existing dumpster located on Lot 2B2. • Variances to the Landscape Ordinance. Peter Hennessey, Hennessey Engineering, 1417 W. Main Street, Suite 100, Carrollton, Texas, 75006, was present to address questions and concerns from the commission. Mr. Hennessey stated that he is in agreement with the conditions presented by staff. Chairman Haas opened the Public Hearing and advised that no one signed up to speak and no one wished to speak. Chairman Haas closed the Public Hearing. A motion was made by Commissioner Robinson, seconded by Vice Chairman Portman, to recommend approval of this agenda item with the conditions presented by staff. The motion passed by unanimous vote. (7-0) Action Text: Chair Edmund Haas, Vice Chair Glenn Portman, Commissioner Sue Blankenship, Commissioner Doug Robinson, Commissioner George Williford, Commissioner Freddie Guerra, and Commissioner Ed Maurer 7Aye: 2 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3798 Title PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of PD-293-LI, Sherrill Acres, a zoning change request from LI (Light Industrial) to PD-293-LI (Planned Development 293 -Light Industrial) to allow the subdivision of the property into two lots, allowing the retention of the existing office on Lot 2B1 and the approval of Concept Plan for Lot 2B2 for a future office building, containing 1.44 acres of property located at 1703 East Belt Line Road, at the request of Riverchase Realty LLC, being represented by Geoff Walker. Summary Fiscal Impact: None Staff Recommendation: On February 15, 2018, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of PD-293-LI, Sherrill Acres the following conditions will be incorporated as PD Conditions: 1.Approval of a Detail Site Plan shall be required prior to the development Lot 2B2. 2.The hike and bike trail shall be constructed by the property owner/developer from the southern property line to Belt Line Road prior to the certificate of occupancy for the Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3798) development on Lot 2B2 or within five years, whichever occurs first. 3.The occupants of the building on Lot 2B2 shall be permitted to advertise on the existing monument sign located on Lot 2B1. 4.The occupants of Lot 2B1 shall retain the right to use the existing dumpster located on Lot 2B2. 5.Variances to the Landscape Ordinance. The Planning Department recommends approval. Goal Icon: Business Prosperity Page 3City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Mindi Hurley, Director of Community Development Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Consider approval of PD-293-LI, Sherrill Acres, a rezoning request from LI to PD-293- LI to allow the subdivision of the property into two lots, allowing the retention of the existing office on Lot 2B1 and the approval of Concept Plan for Lot 2B2 for the future office building, containing 1.44 acres of property located at 1703 East Belt Line Road. 2030: Business Prosperity Executive Summary: This lot has recently been purchased and the current owners desire to sell the southern portion of the lot for a separate office development. When an existing lot is divided into two it alters the development regulations, including increasing the landscaping requirements, adjusting the building lines and presents other development challenges. To allow this to occur and still be compliant with the various provisions of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, a Planned Development District was required. Introduction: This property is a part of a three-lot subdivision which contains three medical offices and one general office. When the lotting pattern was approved in the early 2000’s it was envisioned that this lot would be developed with two office buildings sharing access, parking, dumpters, etc. Since that time, the medical office was constructed on the northern portion of the lot, and the southern portion remains vacant. To allow a second office building to be constructed on a separate lot, several setback and landscape variances and a flag lot configuration was required to comply with Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. When this was approved approximately 15 years ago, a 15’ wide hike and bike trail easement was dedicated along the west property line of this tract. To address the deficit in landscaping, the applicant has offered to build the hike and bike trail along the extent of their property. While this is not an ideal lotting pattern, the existence of two lots will be invisible to occupants and visitors to the site, and allowing the development of an office building on this long-standing vacant property is desirable. Analysis: On February 15, 2018, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of PD-293-LI, Sherrill Acres the following conditions will be incorporated as PD Conditions: 1. Approval of a Detail Site Plan shall be required prior to the development Lot 2B2. 2 2. The hike and bike trail shall be constructed by the property owner/developer from the southern property line to Belt Line Road prior to the certificate of occupancy for the development on Lot 2B2 or within five years, whichever occurs first. 3. The occupants of the building on Lot 2B2 shall be permitted to advertise on the existing monument sign located on Lot 2B1. 4. The occupants of Lot 2B1 shall retain the right to use the existing dumpster located on Lot 2B2. 5. Variances to the Landscape Ordinance. Legal Review: This item did not require City Attorney review Fiscal Impact: None Recommendation: The Planning Department recommends approval. Attachments: 1. Staff Report 2. Site Plan 3. Tree Survey 4. Landscape Plan ITEM 5 Page 1 of 3 CITY OF COPPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT CASE NO.: PD-293-LI, Sherrill Acres P&Z HEARING DATE: February 15, 2018 C.C. HEARING DATE: March 27, 2018 STAFF REP.: Marcie Diamond, Assistant Director of Community Development/Planning LOCATION: 1703 and 1707 East Belt Line Road SIZE OF AREA: 1.44 acres of property CURRENT ZONING: LI (Light Industrial) REQUEST: A zoning change request to PD-293-LI (Planned Development 293-Light Industrial) to allow the subdivision of the property into two lots, allowing the retention of the existing office on Lot 2B1 and the approval of Concept Plan for Lot 2B2 for the future office building APPLICANT: Owner: Engineer: Stephen Walker/John Paul West Pete Hennessey Riverchase Realty, LLC Hennessey Engineering 1703 East Belt Line Road 1417 W. Main, Suite 100 Coppell, Texas, 75019 Carrollton, Texas 75006 heneng2@aol.com HISTORY: On April 11, 2000, City Council approved a preliminary plat for three (3) lots known as Sherrill Acres, totaling 4.5121 acres. Also at that time, site plan approval was granted for the existing Veterinary Clinic situated east of the subject property. In 2002 City Council approved a replat and site plans for a medical building on Lot 2A (existing dental office) and a future office building on Lot 2B (current request area). In 2013, a site plan for a 11,378-square foot office building (Justice Benefits) was approved abutting the subject tract to the east. This lot and has a similar “flag lot” pattern to allow the development of the rear portion of the lot to have frontage on a dedicated street. TRANSPORTATION: East Beltline Road is a P6D six-lane divided major thoroughfare built within a 120’ wide right-of-way. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North- Railroad, Stoneleigh at Riverchase Apartments; MF-2 (Multi-family) South - St. Marin Apartments; PD-162-MF-2 (Planned Development Multi-family) ITEM 5 Page 2 of 3 East - Vacant (currently proposed for medical office); LI (Light Industrial) West – Former Landscape Nursery ; LI (Light Industrial) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Coppell 2030, A Comprehensive Master Plan, indicates this property as Urban Residential Neighborhood which permits higher density residential as well as small scale commercial uses that serve the residents of the neighborhood. DISCUSSION: As detailed above, this property is a part of a three-lot subdivision which contains three medical offices (veterinary, pediatrician, and dental) and one general office. When the lotting pattern was approved in the early 2000’s it was envisioned that the subject property lot (Lot 2A) would be developed with two office buildings on one lot sharing access, parking, dumpters, etc. Since that time, the medical office was constructed on the northern portion of the lot, and the southern portion remains vacant. As part of the approval process approximately 15 years ago, a 15’ wide hike and bike trail easement was dedicated along the west property line of this tract. This lot has recently been purchased and the current owners desire to sell the southern portion of the lot for a separate office development. When an existing lot is divided into two it alters the development regulations, including increasing the landscaping requirements, adjusting the building lines and presents other development challenges. To allow this to occur and still be compliant with the various provisions of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, a Planned Development District was required. Specifically, this PD will recognize the existing office development on Lot 2B1 (1703 East Belt Line) and allow a second office on the southern lot (1707 East Belt Line). To comply with Subdivision Ordinance regulation that all lots have frontage on a dedicated street, Lot 2B2 has been configured as a “flag lot”, with 50’ of frontage on Belt Line Road, then a 12’ wide mutual access easement, and then widening to full width to accommodate the building pad and required parking. The following PD Conditions will be required to accommodate the proposed lot configuration:  Shared multi-tenant sign - currently located on Lot 2B1 which will allow Lot 2B2 to advertise.  Shared dumpser – currently located on Lot 2B2 and Lot 2B1 will retain the right to use  Shared Access – there is an existing mutual access along the east property line which will access to Lots 2A, 2B1, 2B2 and Lot 3 of this subdivision. As mentioned above, the adding of a lot line also increases the amount of landscaping required, partially due to the requirement that there be a minimum of 10’ of landscaped buffer strip along all property lines. This requirement cannot be met while providing the required parking. Additionally, achieving the perimeter landscape requirement on the east and west lot lines is hindered by the existence of the mutual access easement to the east and the hike a bike trail easement to the west. The landscape calculations are still in error, but it appears that the southern lot (future ITEM 5 Page 3 of 3 office) is also short of overall landscape areas. To address this deficit, the applicant/property owner has offered to construct the approximate 400’ long, 10-foot-wide hike and bike trail within the 15’ wide easement that was established in 2003. The construction of this trail will occur with the development of Lot 2B2. The connection of this trail system is in the Trails Master Plan. Parks Department has recommended that this segment be constructed within the next five years. While this is not an ideal lotting pattern, the existence of two lots will be invisible to occupants and visitors to the site, and allowing the development of an office building on this long-standing vacant property is desirable. RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Staff is recommending APPROVAL of PD-293-LI, Sherrill Acres, subject to the following conditions: 1. Correct the landscape calculations to allow the determination of the specific variances being requested. 2. The following will be incorporated as PD Conditions: o Approval of a Detail Site Plan shall be required prior to the development Lot 2B2. o The hike and bike trail shall be constructed by the property owner/developer from the southern property line to Belt Line Road prior to the certificate of occupancy for the development on Lot 2B2 or within five years, whichever occurs first. o The occupants of the building on Lot 2B2 shall be permitted to advertise on the existing monument sign located on Lot 2B1. o The occupants of Lot 2B1 shall retain the right to use the existing dumpster located on Lot 2B2. o Variances to the Landscape Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: 1. Recommend approval of the request 2. Recommend disapproval of the request 3. Recommend modification of the request 4. Take under advisement for reconsideration at a later date ATTACHMENTS: 1. Site Plan 2. Tree Survey 3. Landscape Plan Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2017-3606 File ID: Type: Status: 2017-3606 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 4Version: Reference: In Control: Planning & Zoning Commission 10/09/2017File Created: Final Action: S-1262-LI, Drivers SelectFile Name: Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of an Ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 91500-A-718 for Case No. S-1262-LI, Driversselect, to no longer allow the occupancy of the existing 153,000 square foot office/warehouse building for internet-based car sales and ancillary uses (minor car repair, car storage and offices) on approximately 8.7 acres of land located at 100 S. Royal Lane; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 16. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Cover Memo.pdf, Staff Report.pdf, Letter from ML Realty.pdf, Rescinding Ord S-1262-LI.pdf, OR 91500-A-718 Driversselect.pdf Attachments: Enactment Number: OR 91500-A-718 Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 4 Mindi Hurley 1 3/21/20183/20/2018 Approve 4 Christel Pettinos - FYI 2 3/20/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 PassApproved10/19/2017Planning & Zoning Commission Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3606) Ms. Diamond introduced the case with exhibits. Ms. Diamond stated that staff is recommending approval subject to the following conditions: 1. All parking spaces visible from Royal Lane shall be solely used for customer and employee parking. 2. There shall be no vehicle display outside of the building. All vehicles parked outside of the screened area shall be limited to customer and employee parking. At no time shall there be signs/banners/painting on windows, etc. on any car or vehicle indicating that it is for sale. 3. There shall be no car repair, maintenance, painting or similar activities occurring outside of the building at any time. 4. Tires stored outside the building shall be contained within the storage building as indicated on the Site Plan. 5. In the event that the evergreen tree row along the north property line is removed, or no longer provides the visual screen, then either a solid screening wall and/or replacement trees will be required to allow the continuation of outdoor storage along the north side of the building. 6. The re-occupancy of this building for this use shall adhere to all Building, Fire, and Environmental Codes. 7. A Minor Amending Plat shall be required to provide the extension of the fire lane, as indicated on the site plan. 8. If the off-site vehicle storage is located within the City of Coppell, then an Amendment to this SUP will be required. 9. Compliance with any additional comments generated during final engineering review. Commissioner Williford asked Ms. Diamond about the landscape plan being low. Ms. Diamond stated that much of the property is exempt since the majority of it is screened from the public right of way. Ms. Diamond stated that the applicant will be providing additional landscaping along Royal Lane. Dan Weiss, Driversselect, 3314 Corkwood Drive, Frisco, Texas, was present to address questions and concerns from the commission. Commissioner Robinson asked if individuals have an opportunity to come into the facility to view a vehicle before purchasing. Mr. Weiss stated that individuals view the cars online, and then they come to the facility to test drive the car before the purchase. Commissioner Robinson asked if the Driversselect staff reconditions engines and transmissions. Mr. Weiss stated that they do not. The cars that they sell are under factory warranty. Driversselect does not perform that type of vehicle service. Commissioner Robinson asked how employees would put fuel in the vehicles. Mr. Weiss stated that the Fire Code allows for up to 5 gallons of fuel in the vehicles. Once a purchase is made, a sales representative would take the vehicle to a gas station to fill up the gas tank for the customer when the vehicle is purchased. Chairman Haas asked Mr. Weiss if a test drive would be done through a residential neighborhood. Mr. Weiss stated that test drives will not be done in residential areas. Commissioner Guerra asked where the staging area is going to be onsite. Mr. Weiss stated that the "sold" or staging area is going to be towards the back of the property. Commissioner Blankenship asked if there is going to be car washing onsite. Mr. Weiss stated that there will be car washing onsite, it will be inside the facility, and it will comply with all regulations on water disposal. Commissioner Blankenship asked if minor repairs will be done onsite. Mr. Weiss stated that minor services such as oil changes, air filter changes, and tire changes are done onsite. Commissioner Blankenship asked how they plan on disposing of tires. Mr. Weiss stated that they Action Text: Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3606) pay a company to come pick up the used tires from the facility. Commissioner Blankenship asked if a customer hasn't viewed the Driversselect website, can they come into the facility to browse the available inventory. Mr. Weiss stated yes, they can view the inventory through a kiosk onsite, but most customers have already viewed the website and know which car they are going to purchase. Chairman Haas asked Mr. Weiss if they will be doing window tinting or any customization to the vehicles. Mr. Weiss stated that they will not be doing any customizations to the vehicles. Mr. Weiss agreed with the conditions presented by staff. Commissioner Williford asked George Marshall if there is any concern with the drainage with the adjacent property owner. Mr. Marshall stated that they will be looking at the detailed engineering plans once they are submitted to ensure that there aren't any drainage issues. Chairman Haas asked Mr. Marshall if there will be any onsite circulation issues with large trucks delivering vehicles. Mr. Marshall stated that Driversselect will be extending the fire lane around the entire building which will help their delivery trucks as well as Fire Department responses with their large trucks. Chairman Haas asked Mr. Weiss how the vehicles will be delivered to the property. Mr. Weiss stated that the northside of the building will have a loading area where the large trucks will deliver vehicles. Chairman Haas opened the Public Hearing. The following persons spoke: Paul Colton, 156 Glenwood Drive, Coppell, Texas, 75019. Mr. Colton expressed concern with the signage of Driversselect. He stated that the 18-wheeler trucks that deliver the vehicles are also a concern. Ms. Jenny Walter, 156 Glenwood Drive, Coppell, Texas, 75019. Ms. Walter asked what kind of trucks will be picking up used tires from the property. Chairman Haas closed the Public Hearing. Chairman Haas asked Mr. Weiss if the submitted signage is the official logo of Driversselect. Alissa Sutton, Design and Project Manager for Driversselect, 13615 N. Central Expressway, Dallas, Texas, 75243, was present to address questions and concerns from the commission. Ms. Sutton explained that orange is the official color of Driversselect. Ms. Sutton stated that the submitted design is a toned-down version of their official logo. Chairman Haas asked Ms. Sutton if the design is a registered trademark. Ms. Sutton replied that it is. Ms. Diamond stated the size and color of the sign is compliant with the Sign Ordinance. Ms. Diamond also stated that before a sign permit is issued by Building Inspections, they will check that the trademark is registered. Commissioner Sarma asked Ms. Sutton if Driverrsselect would be willing to put a shortened version of the logo on the building. Ms. Sutton stated that they plan on placing "Driversselect" on the building. Matt Smith, ML Realty Partners, 6930 Arboreal Drive, Dallas, Texas, 75231, was present to address questions and concerns from the commission. Mr. Smith stated that the sign will be in boxed letters. Chairman Haas asked Mr. Weiss what kind of trucks pick up the used tires from the property. Mr. Weiss stated that it is an enclosed box truck. A motion was made by Commissioner Williford, seconded by Vice Chairman Portman, to recommend approval of this agenda item with the conditions outlined by staff. The motion passed by Page 3City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3606) unanimous vote. Chair Edmund Haas, Vice Chair Glenn Portman, Commissioner Sue Blankenship, Commissioner Doug Robinson, Vijay Sarma, Commissioner George Williford, and Commissioner Freddie Guerra 7Aye: 2 PassClose the Public Hearing and Approve 11/14/2017City Council Presentation: Marcie Diamond, Assistant Director of Planning, made a presentation to the City Council. Mayor Hunt opened the Public Hearing and advised that no one signed up to speak. Steve Hall, Applicant, 13615 North Central Expressway, Dallas, was available for questions. A motion was made by Councilmember Marvin Franklin, seconded by Councilmember Gary Roden, to close the Public Hearing and approve this Agenda Item subject to the following conditions as part of this Special Use Permit: 1) All parking spaces visible from Royal Lane shall be solely used for customer and employee parking; 2) There shall be no vehicle display outside of the building. All vehicles parked outside of the screened area shall be limited to customer and employee parking. At no time shall there be signs/banners/painting on windows, etc. on any car or vehicle indicating that it is for sale; 3) There shall be no car repair, maintenance, painting or similar activities occurring outside of the building at any time; 4) Tires stored outside the building shall be contained within the storage building as indicated on the Site Plan; 5) In the event that the evergreen tree row along the north property line is removed, or no longer provides the visual screen, then either a solid screening wall and/or replacement trees will be required to allow the continuation of outdoor storage along the north side of the building; 6) The re-occupancy of this building for this use shall adhere to all Building, Fire, and Environmental Codes; 7) A Minor Amending Plat shall be required to provide the extension of the fire lane, as indicated on the site plan; 8) If the off-site vehicle storage is located within the City of Coppell, then an Amendment to this SUP will be required; and 9) Compliance with any additional comments generated during final engineering review. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Action Text: Councilmember Cliff Long, Brianna Hinojosa-Flores, Councilmember Gary Roden, Councilmember Marvin Franklin, Councilmember Mark Hill, and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 6Aye: 3 PassApproved on the Consent Agenda 12/12/2017City Council A motion was made by Councilmember Marvin Franklin, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling, that Consent Agenda Items A-R be approved. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Action Text: 4 03/27/2018City Council Page 4City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3606) Text of Legislative File 2017-3606 Title PUBLIC HEARING: Consider approval of an Ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 91500-A-718 for Case No. S-1262-LI, Driversselect, to no longer allow the occupancy of the existing 153,000 square foot office/warehouse building for internet-based car sales and ancillary uses (minor car repair, car storage and offices) on approximately 8.7 acres of land located at 100 S. Royal Lane; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Summary Fiscal Impact: None Staff Recommendation: On November 14, 2017, City Council approved this SUP for internet-based car sales subject to the conditions as specified by the Planning and Zoning Commission, which are detailed below. On October 19, 2017, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended Approval of S-1262-LI Driversselect, subject to the following conditions being incorporated into the SUP Conditions, if granted. 1. All parking spaces visible from Royal Lane shall be solely used for customer and employee parking. 2. There shall be no vehicle display outside of the building. All vehicles parked outside of the screened area shall be limited to customer and employee parking. At no time shall there be signs/banners/painting on windows, etc. on any car or vehicle indicating that it is for sale. 3. There shall be no car repair, maintenance, painting or similar activities occurring outside of the building at any time. 4. Tires stored outside the building shall be contained within the storage building as indicated on the Site Plan. 5. In the event that the evergreen tree row along the north property line is removed, or no longer provides the visual screen, then either a solid screening wall and/or replacement trees will be required to allow the continuation of outdoor storage along the north side of the building. 6. The re-occupancy of this building for this use shall adhere to all Building, Fire, and Environmental Codes. 7. A Minor Amending Plat shall be required to provide the extension of the fire lane, as indicated on the site plan. 8. If the off-site vehicle storage is located within the City of Coppell, then an Amendment to this SUP will be required. 9. Compliance with any additional comments generated during final engineering review. The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL. Goal Icon: Page 5City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3606) Business Prosperity Page 6City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Mindi Hurley, Director of Community Development Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Consideration of approval of an Ordinance rescinding of Ordinance No. 91500-A-718 for Case No. S-1262-LI, Driversselect to no longer allow the occupancy of the existing 153,000 square foot office/warehouse building for internet-based car sales and ancillary uses (minor car repair, car storage and offices) on approximately 8.7 acres of land located at 100 S. Royal Lane, and authorizing the Mayor to sign. 2030: Business Prosperity Executive Summary: City Council approved this SUP for an internet-based car sale and further approved an SUP for the storage lot on the Fellowship Church site to be an ancillary use to the proposed car sales. Introduction: Staff received notification that Driversselect was not going to lease the facility at 100 S. Royal Lane. The building owners formally requested that this SUP be rescinded. Also on this agenda is the Ordinance for the ancillary storage lot, which is recommended for denial. Analysis: On November 14, 2017 City Council approved this SUP for internet based car sales, and Ordinance 91500-A-718 was subsequently adopted on December 12th. On October 19, 2017, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended Approval of S-1262-LI Driversselect, the following conditions will be incorporated into the SUP Conditions, if granted. 1. All parking spaces visible from Royal Lane shall be solely used for customer and employee parking. 2. There shall be no vehicle display outside of the building. All vehicles parked outside of the screened area shall be limited to customer and employee parking. At no time shall there be signs/banners/painting on windows, etc. on any car or vehicle indicating that it is for sale. 3. There shall be no car repair, maintenance, painting or similar activities occurring outside of the building at any time. 4. Tires stored outside the building shall be contained within the storage building as indicated on the Site Plan. 5. In the event that the evergreen tree row along the north property line is removed, or no longer provides the visual screen, then either a solid screening wall and/or replacement trees 2 will be required to allow the continuation of outdoor storage along the north side of the building. 6. The re-occupancy of this building for this use shall adhere to all Building, Fire, and Environmental Codes. 7. A Minor Amending Plat shall be required to provide the extension of the fire lane, as indicated on the site plan. 8. If the off-site vehicle storage is located within the City of Coppell, then an Amendment to this SUP will be required. 9. Compliance with any additional comments generated during final engineering review. Legal Review: The City Attorney reviewed this ordinance. Fiscal Impact: None Recommendation: The Planning Department recommends approval. Attachments: 1. Staff Report 2. ML Realty Letter dated February 21, 2018 3. OR 91500-A-718 4. Ordinance to Rescind 91500-A-718 ITEM # 5 Page 1 of 2 CITY OF COPPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT Rescind - S-1262-LI Driversselect (Four Seasons Addition, Lot 1) P&Z HEARING DATE: March 22, 2018 CC HEARING DATE: March 27, 2018 STAFF REP.: Marcie Diamond, Assistant Director of Community Development/Planning LOCATION: 100 S. Royal Lane SIZE OF AREA: 8.7 acres of property CURRENT ZONING: S-1262-LI (Special Use Permit 1262-Light Industrial) PROPOSED ZONING: LI (Light Industrial) REQUEST: To rescind the SUP ordinance which would have permitted the occupancy of the existing 153,000 square foot office/warehouse building for internet-based car sales and ancillary uses (minor car repair, car storage and offices). APPLICANT: Owner: MMRP 100 Royal LP 1 Pierce Place Suite 450 Itasca, IL 60143 630-250-2900 nkozinski@mlrealtypartnets.com HISTORY: In 1990, a final plat and site plan were approved for a 13.7 acre tract of land. The original plans included the construction of the existing 153,00 square-foot building and a future 138,000 building fronting Sandy Lake Road. The building on the subject property was constructed 1992, and the second building, fronting on Sandy Lake Road, in 2005. In 2002, City Council approved a Site Plan Amendment for the subject property to allow an additional equipment enclosure, screened outdoor storage and signage. To be complaint with the Zoning Ordinance an 8-foot tall dark green granite screening wall (over aggregate) was proposed to enclose the area used for outside storage. The new equipment enclosure was located to the rear of the building and is not visible form adjacent properties. On November 14, 2017 City Council approved this SUP for this internet-based car sales. On January 9, 2018 City Council approved the SUP for the storage lot on the Fellowship Church site to be an ancillary use to the proposed car sales. ITEM # 5 Page 2 of 2 Staff received notification that Driversselect was not going to lease the facility at 100 S. Royal Lane. The building owners formally requested that this SUP be rescinded. Also on Council’s March 27th agenda will be the denial of the Ordinance for the SUP for the car storage facility. HISTORIC COMMENT: There is no historic significance related to the subject property. TRANSPORTATION: Royal Lane is a four-lane thoroughfare built within 100 feet of right-of-way. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North – office/warehouse; LI South – office/warehouse; LI East - office/warehouse; LI West - Dallas County Community College; PD-224R-HC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Coppell 2030 Comprehensive Master Plan, adopted March 22, 2011, shows the property as suitable for Industrial Special District uses. DISCUSSION: As detailed above, City Council approved this SUP for this internet-based car sales and further approved an SUP for the storage lot on the Fellowship Church site to be an ancillary use to the proposed car sales. Staff received notification that Driversselect was not going to lease the facility at 100 s. Royal Lane. The building owners formally requested that this SUP be rescinded. RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Staff is recommending the rescinding of S-1262-LI Driversselect (Four Seasons Addition, Lot 1). . ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approval of the request 2. Denial of the request 3. Modification of the request 4. Hold this case under advisement until a later date. ATTACHMENTS: 1. ML Realty Letter dated February 21, 2018 2. OR 91500-A-718 3. Draft Ordinance to Rescind 91500-A-718 1 TM 96871 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY GRANTING A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM S-1262-LI (SPECIAL USE PERMIT-1262) TO LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) TO REVOKE THE EXISTING SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY OF THE EXISTING 153,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDING FOR INTERNET-BASED CAR SALES AND ANCILLARY USES (MINOR CAR REPAIR, CAR STORAGE AND OFFICES) ON APPROXIMATELY 8.7 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 100 S. ROYAL LANE AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT “A” ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission and the governing body of the City of Coppell, Texas, in compliance with the laws of the State of Texas and pursuant to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, have given requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and after holding due hearings and affording a full and fair hearing to all property owners generally, and to all persons interested and situated in the affected area and in the vicinity thereof, the said governing body is of the opinion that a LI District should be approved, and in the exercise of legislative discretion have concluded that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map should be amended. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map of the City of Coppell, Texas, duly passed by the governing body of the City of Coppell, Texas, as heretofore amended, be and the same is hereby amended to grant a change in zoning from S-1262-LI (Special Use Permit- 1262) TO LI (Light Industrial) to revoke the existing Special Use Permit and the special conditions adopted for the occupancy of the existing 153,000 square foot office/warehouse building for internet-based automobile sales and ancillary uses (minor car repair, car storage and offices) on 2 TM 96871 approximately 8.7 acres of land located at 100 S. Royal Lane and being more particularly described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes. SECTION 2. That S-1262-LI and the special conditions are hereby revoked and the development of the property shall be in accordance with the LI (Light Industrial) district, as amended. SECTION 3. That the above property shall be used only in the manner and for the purpose provided for by the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, as heretofore amended, and as amended herein. SECTION 4. That the development of the property herein shall be in accordance with building regulations, zoning ordinances, and any applicable ordinances except as may be specifically altered or amended herein. SECTION 5. That all provisions of the Ordinances of the City of Coppell, Texas, in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same are hereby, repealed, and all other provisions not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 6. That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, and shall not affect the validity of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as a whole. SECTION 7. An offense committed before the effective date of this ordinance is governed by prior law and the provisions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, as amended, in effect when the offense was committed and the former law is continued in effect for this purpose. SECTION 8. That any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions or terms of this ordinance shall be subject to the same penalty as provided for in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, as heretofore amended, and upon conviction shall be punished by 3 TM 96871 a fine not to exceed the sum of Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense; and each and every day such violation shall continue shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense. SECTION 9. That this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage and the publication of its caption, as the law and charter in such cases provide. DULY PASSED by the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas, this the _______ day of ___________________, 2018. APPROVED: _____________________________________ KAREN SELBO HUNT, MAYOR ATTEST: _____________________________________ CHRISTEL PETTINOS, CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________ CITY ATTORNEY LEGAL DESCRIPTION LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEING a tract of land out of the Jesse Moore Survey, Abstract No. 968, Dallas County, Texas and being all of Lot 1, the Final Plat of Four Seasons Addition, an addition to the City of Coppell, as recorded in Volume 99241, Page 00196 of the Deed Records of Dallas County, Texas, (D,R.D.C.T.) and being the same tract as described in Special Warranty Deed to MLRP 100 Royal Limited Partnership, as recorded in Document 200503587532 of the Official Public Records of Dallas County, Texas O.P.R.D,C_T., and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at a 112 -inch found iron rod with a yellow plastic cap stamped "HALFF ASSOC." hereafter referred to as "with cap") for the southwest corner of said Lit 1 and the northwest comer of Lot 1C -R of Amberpoint Business Park at Coppell addition, as recorded in Document No, 201400146557 D.R.D.C.T., said comer also being on the east right-of-way line of Royal Lane (100 foot right-of-way, as recorded in Volurne 88118, Page 877, D.R.D.C.T,); THENCE North 00 degrees 10 minutes 02 seconds West, along said east right-of-way line and the west line of said Lot 1, a distance of 626.95 feet to a 112 -Inch found iron rod with cap for corner; THENCE North 89 degrees 50 minutes 01 secondEast, departing said east right -cif -way line and along the north line of said Lot 1, same being the south line of Lot 2R, Four Season Addition, (dedicated as Lot 2), as recorded in Volume 2004228, Page 121, D.R.D.C.T., a distance of 606.15 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1 and common southeast corner of said Lot 2R, from which said point a 112 -inch found iron rod bears South 89 degrees 50 minutes 01 second West, 0.42 feet, said point also being on the west line of Lot 1AR, Block A of Amberpoint Business Park at Coppell Addition, as recorded in Document No. 20070356424, D.R.D.C.T.; THENCE South 00 degrees 10 minutes 34 seconds East, along the common east lime of said Lot 1 and west line of said Lot 1AR, a distance of 626.87 feet to a 112 -Irish found iron rod for the southeast corner of said Lot 1, same being the northeast corner of the aforementioned Lot 1C -R; THENCE South 89 degrees 40 minutes 36 seconds West, departing said common east and west lines and along the common south line of said Lot 1 and north line of said Lot IC -R, a distance of 606.25 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING AND CONTAINING 380,031 square feet or 8.724 acres of land more or less. EXHIBIT "A" AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. 91500-A-718 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY GRANTING A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM A REZONING FROM LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) TO S -1262 -LI (SPECIAL USE PERMIT -1262) TO ALLOW THE OCCUPANCY OF THE EXISTING 153,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDING FOR INTERNET -BASED CAR SALES AND ANCILLARY USES (MINOR CAR REPAIR, CAR STORAGE AND OFFICES) ON APPROXIMATELY 8.7 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 100 S. ROYAL LANE AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE SITE PLAN, LANDSCAPE PLAN, FLOOR PLAN AND SIGN EXHIBIT, ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBITS `B", "C", "D", AND "E", RESPECTIVELY; PROVIDING DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; PROVIDING A REPEALING CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission and the governing body of the City of Coppell, Texas, in compliance with the laws of the State of Texas and pursuant to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, have given requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and after holding due hearings and affording a full and fair hearing to all property owners generally, and to all persons interested and situated in the affected area and in the vicinity thereof, the said governing body is of the opinion that Zoning Application No. S -1262 -LI should be approved, and in the exercise of legislative discretion have concluded that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map should be amended. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map of the City of Coppell, Texas, duly passed by the governing body of the City of Coppell, Texas, as heretofore amended, be and the same is hereby amended to grant a change in zoning from a from LI (Light Industrial) to S- 1262 -LI (Special Use Permit -1262) to allow the occupancy of the existing 153,000 square foot office/warehouse building for internet-based automobile sales and ancillary uses (minor car repair, car storage and offices) on approximately 8.7 acres of land located at 100 S. Royal Lane and being more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes, subject to the special conditions established herein. SECTION 2. That 5 -1262 -LI and Special Use Permit (SUP) are hereby approved subject to the following special conditions: A. There shall be no display for sale, lease or resale of automobile outside of the primary structure. However, motor vehicles inventory ("vehicle storage") may be stored outside provided such storage is screened from public view as depicted on the approved Site Plan, Exhibit B. All motor vehicles parked outside of the screened area shall be limited to customer and employee parking as depicted on the approved Site Plan, Exhibit B. At no time shall there be signs/banners/painting on windows or other types of identification which would indicate that automobiles or other motorize vehicles are for sale, lease, resale or combination thereof. B. There shall not be any repair, maintenance, painting, service or similar activities (minor auto service) outside of the primary structure at any time; and, any and all such repairs, maintenance or service shall be conducted inside the main structure and shall only be dedicated to the internet sale motor vehicles and not offered such repair services to the general public. C. Tires or parts stored outside the main structure shall be contained within the accessory storage structure as depicted on the approved Site Plan, Exhibit B. D. In the event that the evergreen tree row along the north property line is removed, or no longer provides the visual screen, then either a solid screening wall and/or replacement trees will be required to allow the continuation of outdoor storage along the north side of the building. 2 TM 93482 E. The re -occupancy of this main structure and accessory storage structure shall be required to apply; receive and maintain the required certificate, permits and authorization for this use; and, shall adhere to all Building, Fire, and Environmental Codes, including but not limited to the storage, maintenance, use and disposal of gasoline, oil, petroleum products and other solvents. F. A Minor Amending Plat shall be required to provide the extension of the fire lane, as indicated on the site plan. G. If the off-site vehicle storage, display or use in connection with this use, is located within the City of Coppell, then an Amendment to this SUP will be required. H. Compliance with any additional comments generated during final engineering review. SECTION 3. That the Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Floor Plan and Sign Exhibit, attached hereto as Exhibits "B", "C", "D", and "E" respectively, are made a part of the special condition hereof for all purposes, and hereby approved. SECTION 4. That the above property shall be used only in the manner and for the purpose provided for by the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, as heretofore amended, and as amended herein. SECTION 5. That the development of the property herein shall be in accordance with building regulations, zoning ordinances, and any applicable ordinances except as may be specifically altered or amended herein. SECTION 6. That all provisions of the Ordinances of the City of Coppell, Texas, in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same are hereby, repealed, and all other provisions not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 7. That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, the same shall not affect 3 TM 93482 the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, and shall not affect the validity of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as a whole. SECTION 8. An offense committed before the effective date of this ordinance is governed by prior law and the provisions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, as amended, in effect when the offense was committed and the former law is continued in effect for this purpose. SECTION 9. That any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions or terms of this ordinance shall be subject to the same penalty as provided for in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, as heretofore amended, and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine not to exceed the sum of Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense; and each and every day such violation shall continue shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense. SECTION 10. That this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage and the publication of its caption, as the law and charter in such cases provide. DULY PASSED by the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas, this the IL L day of 4 TM 93482 LEGAL DESCRIPTION LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEING a tract of land out of the Jesse Moore Survey, Abstract No. 968, Dallas County, Texas and being all of Lot 1, the Final Plat of Four Seasons Addition, an addition to the City of Coppell, as recorded in Volume 99241, Page 00196 of the Deed Records of Dallas County, Texas, (D,R.D.C.T.) and being the same tract as described in Special Warranty Deed to MLRP 100 Royal Limited Partnership, as recorded in Document 200503587532 of the Official Public Records of Dallas County, Texas O.P.R.D,C_T., and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at a 112 -inch found iron rod with a yellow plastic cap stamped "HALFF ASSOC." hereafter referred to as "with cap") for the southwest corner of said Lit 1 and the northwest comer of Lot 1C -R of Amberpoint Business Park at Coppell addition, as recorded in Document No, 201400146557 D.R.D.C.T., said comer also being on the east right-of-way line of Royal Lane (100 foot right-of-way, as recorded in Volurne 88118, Page 877, D.R.D.C.T,); THENCE North 00 degrees 10 minutes 02 seconds West, along said east right-of-way line and the west line of said Lot 1, a distance of 626.95 feet to a 112 -Inch found iron rod with cap for corner; THENCE North 89 degrees 50 minutes 01 secondEast, departing said east right -cif -way line and along the north line of said Lot 1, same being the south line of Lot 2R, Four Season Addition, (dedicated as Lot 2), as recorded in Volume 2004228, Page 121, D.R.D.C.T., a distance of 606.15 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 1 and common southeast corner of said Lot 2R, from which said point a 112 -inch found iron rod bears South 89 degrees 50 minutes 01 second West, 0.42 feet, said point also being on the west line of Lot 1AR, Block A of Amberpoint Business Park at Coppell Addition, as recorded in Document No. 20070356424, D.R.D.C.T.; THENCE South 00 degrees 10 minutes 34 seconds East, along the common east lime of said Lot 1 and west line of said Lot 1AR, a distance of 626.87 feet to a 112 -Irish found iron rod for the southeast corner of said Lot 1, same being the northeast corner of the aforementioned Lot 1C -R; THENCE South 89 degrees 40 minutes 36 seconds West, departing said common east and west lines and along the common south line of said Lot 1 and north line of said Lot IC -R, a distance of 606.25 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING AND CONTAINING 380,031 square feet or 8.724 acres of land more or less. EXHIBIT "A" l O VOZ WS u03 O Iw WJw w pW rc 33Kwo .. .N w J¢¢ z FF3WU' FN J, z N- ~W~ BL t7 Y U' MD u ug "44"Q' KKWW F o LL Z p N W y. UQ'Q y Z FON ONF'wN(/y>aJ WCW UW OYdJz ¢ zJmN Oiix OO¢ O-mOa Oz9ZY LLm KK Nyaa JJ z I ySy1 N u oiiF0u7O-O¢z>m>_OZOw x ¢_ OJKUO >¢(7w aazmzmN3yomn.aaN3o z"d3 z I(D aoz¢ OOyy JJop wa N 7 U wLL O_2H 6'w to LL1112 F- O w i a Z$z O w ZLLLL N WNW a WWW2 mmNN vv-`.' zQ O Z k' a N NyZmn LL LL LLNNN y W N N N N W U w U a a a a U U U Oaway N N LL LLNy Ja d J OZ7UZQ m ni NN m0g Nh h NyN yyNJ yUmma giOPN x 1' Z Q U e aQro m vmv N&mv c ev m cy yNw n O OLLU O W y J m o a 0 0z w z s N y z uj cwi a z a m 0 wt j;:a w pY O W Wm Smi, K ypjm W UNLLw aQ K p ZOm O VOZ WS u03 O Iw WJw arc33Kwo .. .N w J¢¢ z FF3WU' FN J, z N- ~W~ BL t7 Y U' MD u ug "44"Q' KKWW OZo LL Z p N W y. UQ'Q y Z FON ONF'wN(/y>aJ WCW UW OYdJz ¢ zJmN Oiix OO¢ O-mOa Oz9ZY LLm KK Nyaa JJ Y z u oiiF0u7O-O¢z>m>_OZOw x ¢_ OJKUO >¢(7w aazmzmN3yomn.aaN3o z"d3 z I(D aoz¢ OOyyJJop wa gw= wNW w ug ug -KO X-(N CJK O_2H 6'w K mOju¢W O y WJ Nm a dfL 1- LL1112 F- as i wwi <wN oz H wi Qw m oQti arOF oGGrNryzo waw oma z Qi€ 5mem- j<=w< jis ;'S s w" wo o M- A oFSsWmC a mg-mzF9 c c0< ia ^ FOnNH y maFNoa(Aw ?mismn m rcz5 mks<m C Q9a ; uKf z Fmw ' OYwO _wz u zw m 03'T zoo _wzw o E tst< 1J11111 V l l L s b Gi • n- 6m Vol K w oQ x QI oaa c 1 Zp w W pzpm0 mW <25 N OZOWC2<wgI of wow om 0' 6lzWO Un O On Oa0 4Z J a w a U Z R dv J U y z woaa>loaiga uua S99Z-6lZ-L l8 sezal'sslls0 SVX]l %llo 113ddoo g a mav A L WZ/ l0/ 6 6 BZZSL LZSOLS# PN uosn6iad yZ99 Ib%Od 'SQ3SIA3831VOINV] 00 L NJ rna L l0ZA l/$O A38Vd3Nd 31V0 S3J-VIOOSSb 3N002i8 6 Gi • n- 6m Vol K w oQ x QI oaa c 1 Zp w W pzpm0 mW <25 N OZOWC2<wgI of wow om 0' 6lz WO Un O On Oa0 4Z J a w a U Z R dv J U y OT Exhibit "D" ii W W Z gm HC'.7Il O °mvui J m C, T O eN C O p2 UO b LL M O .- K BX W @ a Q. N VLLl LLLLLL m•fiNlnN W {WjmU WUU hNLLLL Q a NQ% T U7, o!nn NNm N nnnig NhhN h mn nen Svmq viY O U w) NN. O N d N Xa YY O .-N Nyj MmY h w LL E N e 8 Z W 2 corc Q W ro O C WJ W a v F g h w 1 2LLL' u o E.N Wg o LLO m my a HWW^ o a.a¢co o is pzpwm uoo VC cwi D 3WZ O= NQ` MSW 0. rZ_ ry O tl•C 1/i O Om Z d. 2 d <'C 00 v z MU_'pd' Q 0 wm SEES aF Fp zmv3mcm a z s?wo3Nzulpr<)mK2wwVOp7¢OWIi m+pa, ozaa Soo00>j a 3,0 o cm io as w s au zr a LL Exhibit "D" ii A o-¢ COIN Z gm HC'.7Il O °mvui J m C, T O eN m O O UO b LL M O .- Exhibit "D" ii A d Boom o SENSE SEES 1 Exhibit "D" ii a L Um C U f6 CCS (6 C x E m fq Ul 9 L "O 0 N "0 a E U aCO (6C N0_ 0LU z C cy S A m O uO o CO G F Exhibit "E" C9co C cy S cCF CO G 16 r C C 0 m H Exhibit "E" C9co Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2017-3700 File ID: Type: Status: 2017-3700 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 3Version: Reference: In Control: City Council 12/11/2017File Created: Final Action: S-1262R DriversselectFile Name: Title: Consider approval of an Ordinance for Case No. S-1262R-LI, Driversselect (Fellowship of Las Colinas Addition, Lot 2R1, Block 1), a zoning change from LI (Light Industrial) to S-1262R-LI (Special Use Permit-1262 Revised) to allow for vehicle parking and staging on the existing parking lot in conjunction with S-1262-LI on approximately 7.67 acres of land located west of the terminus of Gateview Blvd; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 17. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Cover Memo.pdf, Ordinance.pdf, Exhibit B - Site Plan.pdf Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 3 Mindi Hurley 1 3/21/20183/20/2018 Approve 3 Christel Pettinos - FYI 2 3/20/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 PassApproved12/21/2017Planning & Zoning Commission Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3700) Marcie Diamond, Assistant Director of Community Development/Planning, introduced the case with exhibits. Ms. Diamond stated that staff is recommending approval subject to the following conditions: 1. This is an ancillary use to the internet based vehicle sales established in S-1262-LI. In the event that the 100 S. Royal is no longer used for this use, then this SUP shall be rescinded. 2. All landscape must be in a healthy, growing condition as indicated on the Landscape Plan and if any trees are dead or missing, new ones shall be installed. The placement of the 8' tall black metal fences shall not negatively impact the existing and proposed trees and landscaping. 3. Gates that traverse the fire lane easements shall be equipped with automatic gates with GTT Opticom receivers and manual Knox padlock overrides. 4. There may be additional comments at the time of permitting. Alissa Sutton, Driversselect, 13615 N. Central Expressway, Dallas, Texas, 75243, was present to address questions and concerns from the commission. Ms. Sutton agreed with the conditions presented by staff. Commissioner Williford asked Ms. Sutton how many trips per day will there be between the proposed facility and the 100 S. Royal Lane facility. Ms. Sutton stated that at their current facilities, staff members are making twenty trips per day, but the two facilities are located farther apart. Chairman Haas opened the Public Hearing and advised that no one signed up to speak and no one wished to speak. Chairman Haas closed the Public Hearing. A motion was made by Commissioner Williford, seconded by Vice Chair Portman, to recommend approval of this agenda item with the conditions outlined by staff. The motion passed by unanimous vote. (5-0) Action Text: Chair Edmund Haas, Vice Chair Glenn Portman, Commissioner Sue Blankenship, Commissioner George Williford, and Commissioner Freddie Guerra 5Aye: 2 PassClose the Public Hearing and Approve 01/09/2018City Council Presentation: Marcie Diamond, Assistant Director of Planning, made a presentation to the City Council. Mayor Hunt opened the Public Hearing and advised that no one signed up to speak. Steve Hall, Applicant, was available for questions. A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling, seconded by Councilmember Cliff Long, to close the Public Hearing and approve this Agenda Item subject to the following conditions: 1. This is an ancillary use to the internet-based vehicle sales established in S-1262-LI. In the event that 100 S. Royal is no longer used for this use, then this SUP shall be rescinded. 2. All landscape must be in a healthy, growing condition as indicated on the Landscape Plan and if any trees are dead or missing, new ones shall be installed. The placement of the 8' tall black metal fences shall not negatively impact the existing and proposed trees and landscaping. 3. Gates that traverse the fire lane easements shall be equipped with automatic gates with GTT Opticom receivers and manual Knox padlock overrides. 4. There may be additional comments at the time of permitting. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Action Text: Councilmember Cliff Long, Councilmember Wes Mays, Councilmember Marvin Franklin, Councilmember Mark Hill, and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 5Aye: Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2017-3700) 3 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2017-3700 Title Consider approval of an Ordinance for Case No. S-1262R-LI, Driversselect (Fellowship of Las Colinas Addition, Lot 2R1, Block 1), a zoning change from LI (Light Industrial) to S-1262R-LI (Special Use Permit-1262 Revised) to allow for vehicle parking and staging on the existing parking lot in conjunction with S-1262-LI on approximately 7.67 acres of land located west of the terminus of Gateview Blvd; and authorizing the Mayor to sign. Summary Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends DENIAL of this Ordinance. Staff was recently notified that Driversselect is not going to locate their headquarters to 100 S. Royal Lane, therefore, this Ordinance should be denied. Also, on this agenda is the revocation of the Ordinance for S -1262-LI for the SUP for the Royal Lane facility. On January 9, 2018, the City Council unanimously approved this Special Use Permit, subject to the conditions as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. On December 21, 2017, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended Approval of S-1262R-LI Driversselect, the following conditions: 1.This is an ancillary use to the internet -based vehicle sales established in S -1262-LI. In the event that the 100 S. Royal is no longer used for this use, then this SUP shall be rescinded. 2.All landscape must be in a healthy, growing condition as indicated on the Landscape Plan and if any trees are dead or missing, new ones shall be installed. The placement of the 8’ tall black metal fences shall not negatively impact the existing and proposed trees and landscaping. 3.Gates that traverse the fire lane easements shall be equipped with automatic gates with GTT Opticom receivers and manual Knox padlock overrides. 4.There may be additional comments at the time of permitting. Goal Icon: Business Prosperity Page 3City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Mindi Hurley, Director of Community Development Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Consider DENIAL of an Ordinance for S-1262R-LI, Driversselect, to allow for vehicle parking and staging on the existing parking lot in conjunction with S-1262-LI on approximately 7.67 acres of land located west of the terminus of Gateview Blvd. 2030: Business Prosperity Executive Summary: This request was to convert a portion of the existing Fellowship Church’s parking lot to be an ancillary use to the internet-based vehicle sales established in S-1262-LI for Driversselect. Staff was recently notified that Driverselect is not going to locate their headquarters to 100 S. Royal Lane, therefore, this Ordinance should be denied. Also on this agenda is the revocation of the Ordinance for S-1262-LI for the SUP for the Royal Lane facility. Analysis: On January 9, 2018, the City Council unanimously approved this Special Use Permit, subject to the conditions as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. On December 21, 2017, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended Approval of S-1262R-LI Driversselect, the following conditions: 1. This is an ancillary use to the internet based vehicle sales established in S-1262-LI. In the event that the 100 S. Royal is no longer used for this use, then this SUP shall be rescinded. 2. All landscape must be in a healthy, growing condition as indicated on the Landscape Plan and if any trees are dead or missing, new ones shall be installed. The placement of the 8’ tall black metal fences shall not negatively impact the existing and proposed trees and landscaping. 3. Gates that traverse the fire lane easements shall be equipped with automatic gates with GTT Opticom receivers and manual Knox padlock overrides. 4. There may be additional comments at the time of permitting. Legal Review: The City Attorney reviewed this ordinance. Fiscal Impact: None 2 Recommendation: The Planning Department recommends DENIAL of this Ordinance. Attachments: 1. Ordinance with exhibits 1 TM 95416 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, BY GRANTING A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) TO S-1262R-LI (SPECIAL USE PERMIT-1262 REVISED-LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) TO ALLOW FOR VEHICLE PARKING AND STAGING ON THE EXISTING PARKING LOT IN CONJUNCTION WITH S-1262-LI, DRIVERSSELECT ON APPROXIMATELY 7.67 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED NORTH OF GATEVIEW BLVD., EAST OF THE COPPELL/GRAPEVINE CITY LIMIT LINE (1200 GATEVIEW BLVD), AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT “A” ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN; PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE SITE PLAN AND TREE SURVEY/LANDSCAPE PLAN, ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBITS “B” AND “C” RESPECTIVELY; PROVIDING DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; PROVIDING A REPEALING CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission and the governing body of the City of Coppell, Texas, in compliance with the laws of the State of Texas and pursuant to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, have given requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and after holding due hearings and affording a full and fair hearing to all property owners generally, and to all persons interested and situated in the affected area and in the vicinity thereof, the said governing body is of the opinion that Zoning Application No. S-1262R-LI should be approved, and in the exercise of legislative discretion have concluded that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map should be amended. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Map of the City of Coppell, Texas, duly passed by the governing body of the City of Coppell, Texas, as heretofore amended, be and the same is hereby amended to grant a change in zoning from LI (Light Industrial) to S-1262R- LI (Special Use Permit-1262 Revised-Light Industrial) to allow for outside storage of motor vehicles on the existing surface parking lot to be used only in conjunction with S-1262-LI, 2 TM 95416 Driversselect, on approximately 7.67 acres of land located North of Gateview Blvd., east of the Coppell/Grapevine city limit line (1200 Gateview Blvd) and being more particularly described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes, subject to the development regulations. SECTION 2. That SUP-1262R-LI is hereby approved subject to the following development regulations: A. The vehicle storage is dependent and ancillary to internet based vehicle sales established in SUP-1262-LI on Lot 1, Tract 1 of the Four Seasons Addition located at 100 S. Royal Coppell, Texas (Primary use); that if the Primary use is discontinued, or that SUP is revoked, the Special Use Permitted granted herein shall expire and be subject to revocation. B. There shall be no vehicle display for sale, service or any use on this site. At no time shall there be signs/banners/painting on any vehicle, building (if any), or any other structure; no signage may be affixed attached or incorporated on any automobile, truck, vehicle or any personal property of any kind regarding this use of sale, lease or purchase of such vehicles. C. There shall be no motor vehicle repair, maintenance, washing, painting or similar activities of any kind occurring on this site at any time. D. All landscape must be in a healthy, growing condition as indicated on the Landscape Plan and if any trees are dead or missing, new ones shall be installed. The placement of the 8’ tall black metal fences shall not negatively impact the existing and proposed trees and landscaping. 3 TM 95416 E. Gates that traverse the fire lane easements shall be equipped with automatic gates with GTT Opticom receivers and manual Knox padlock overrides, or other similar device to permit emergency entry by public safety. SECTION 3. That the Site Plan and Tree Survey/Landscape Plan, attached hereto as Exhibits “B” and “C” respectively, are made a part hereof for all purposes as special conditions, and hereby approved. SECTION 4. That the above property shall be used only in the manner and for the purpose provided for by the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, as heretofore amended, and as amended herein. SECTION 5. That the development of the property herein shall be in accordance with building regulations, zoning ordinances, and any applicable ordinances except as may be specifically altered or amended herein. SECTION 6. That all provisions of the Ordinances of the City of Coppell, Texas, in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same are hereby, repealed, and all other provisions not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 7. That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, and shall not affect the validity of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as a whole. SECTION 8. An offense committed before the effective date of this ordinance is governed by prior law and the provisions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, as amended, in effect when the offense was committed and the former law is continued in effect for this purpose. 4 TM 95416 SECTION 9. That any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions or terms of this ordinance shall be subject to the same penalty as provided for in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Coppell, as heretofore amended, and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine not to exceed the sum of Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for each offense; and each and every day such violation shall continue shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense. SECTION 10. That this ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after its passage and the publication of its caption, as the law and charter in such cases provide. DULY PASSED by the City Council of the City of Coppell, Texas, this the _______ day of ___________________, 2018. APPROVED: _____________________________________ KAREN SELBO HUNT, MAYOR ATTEST: _____________________________________ CHRISTEL PETTINOS, CITY SECRETARY APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________ CITY ATTORNEY C I V I L E N G I N E E R I N G420 Johnson Road, Suite 303Keller, Texas 76248Fax 817-337-5133 Phone 817-337-8899DEOTTE, INC.WWW.DEOTTE.COMFIRM REGISTRATION: # F-003116 (TX)669 Airport Freeway, Suite 101Hurst, Texas 76053Phone 972-255-1515www.DLArchitecture.netDaniels & LoveladyA r c h i t e c t u r eFax 972-255-4141Image courtesy of ImagePatch.com © 2014 Microsoft Corporation Exhibit "B" Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3852 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3852 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: Engineering 03/19/2018File Created: Final Action: Parkway Design CO #1File Name: Title: Consider approval of contract amendment number one to J. Volk Consulting, Inc. design contract for the Parkway Blvd. reconstruction project; in the amount of $178,600; and authorizing the City Manager to sign any necessary documents. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 18. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Parkway - CA #1 Memo.pdf, Parkway Original Award Exhibit.pdf, Parkway CA#1 Exhibit.pdf, Parkway - OPC.pdf, Parkway Design Schedule.pdf, Parkway Geometric.pdf, Parkway - CA #1.pdf Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 1 Ken Griffin 1 3/23/20183/22/2018 Approve 1 Jennifer Miller 2 3/23/20183/23/2018 Approve 1 Christel Pettinos - FYI 3 3/23/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3852 Title Consider approval of contract amendment number one to J. Volk Consulting, Inc. design Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3852) contract for the Parkway Blvd. reconstruction project; in the amount of $178,600; and authorizing the City Manager to sign any necessary documents. Summary Fiscal Impact: Funds are available in the ¼ % sales tax for Street Maintenance for this change order. Staff Recommendation: The Engineering Department recommends approval. Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Ken Griffin, P.E., Director of Engineering and Public Works Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Parkway Blvd. Design Contract Amendment #1 2030: Sustainable City Government, Goal 3 Excellent and Well-maintained City Infrastructure and Facilities General Information:  2011 Fugro Pavement Management Study identified Parkway Blvd. as needing repair.  2015 the City engaged in a bicycle master plan and Parkway Blvd was identified as a critical route.  July 28, 2015 Council awarded the Design contract to J Volk for $293,000.  The Engineering and Parks Department hosted public meetings with citizens concerning bikeways/trails/sidepaths along Parkway Blvd.  June 13, 2017 Staff presented Council with a final concept for Parkway Blvd. that includes an 8’ sidepath on the north and a 6’ sidewalk on the south.  With this contract amendment additional services to be performed are: o Basic Design Fee Adjustment $23,500 o Additional Preliminary Planning $ 8,500 o Design Change – Heartz to Lodge $21,500 o Design Change – Lodge to Moore $16,500 o Add Median Street Lighting $28,500 o Add Medina Landscaping $25,000 o Subsurface Utility Engineering $14,400 o Additional Geotech Borings $ 3,500 o Easement Preparation* $37,200 *if necessary Introduction: On June 13, 2017, City Council was updated on the concept of providing additional non-motorized facilities along the Parkway Blvd. corridor from MacArthur Blvd. to Cowboy Dr. The proposed plan included an 8’ sidepath on the north side of the road and widening the sidewalks on the south side from 4’ to 6’ wide where available. 2 The original design contract was awarded on July 28, 2015 to J. Volk Consulting, Inc. The original design called for removal and replacement (same place) of the concrete paving from Heartz Rd. to Alex Rd. on the north side only, Alex Rd. to Lodge Rd. both north and south side and various crack sealing and spot repairs on Parkway between Cowboy Dr. and MacArthur Blvd. The original design contract also included replacement of the water and wastewater lines and reviewing the existing drainage system. Analysis: The reconstruction of a portion of Parkway Blvd. has been planned since 2015 when Council awarded a design contract to J. Volk Engineering. After the award of the design contract there were numerous meetings and discussions regarding non-motorized facilities along the corridor. At the July 13, 2017 Council meeting a consensus of the final schematic was presented. After discussions with the engineer, it was determined that the project had exceeded the original scope. Outlined below are each of the areas where the scope is different: Basic Design Fee Adjustment of $23,500. The original contract was awarded in July of 2015 since that time the cost of services has increased. The work of the engineer was placed on hold while numerous public meetings were held. Now that the project is restarting, the actual labor cost has increased. Additional Preliminary Planning of $8,500. This is to cover the work that was performed creating cross sections and schematics for the public meetings. Design Change – Heartz to Lodge of $21,500. The original scope included reconstruction of Parkway Blvd. from Heartz to Alex on the north side only and designing the roadway in the same configuration as it is today. Because the additional sidepaths and lane narrowing changes how the engineer approaches the design, it was Staff’s opinion that it was necessary to include the reconstruction of Parkway Blvd. from Heartz to Alex on the south side as well. This allows us flexibility in modifying the median and lane widths to accommodate the sidepaths. Design Change – Lodge to Moore of $16,500. This is to design the additional sidepath along the north side of the road and a 6’ sidewalk along the south side. This extends the limits of the original design contract. Add Median Street Lighting of $28,500. This is to continue the lighting package that we have along Denton Tap Rd. and Sandy Lake Rd. This would add the decorative lights from the intersection of Parkway Blvd. and Denton Tap Rd. to Lodge and Parkway Blvd. This was not included in the original design. Add Median Landscaping of $25,000. Along with the additional street lighting, this would add landscaping like Denton Tap Rd. and Sandy Lake Rd. from the intersection of Parkway Blvd. and Denton Tap Rd. to Lodge and Parkway Blvd. This was not included in the original design. Subsurface Utility Engineering(SUE) of $14,400. Since the original design contract award in 2015, the city has seen significant benefit to utilizing SUE. This will be utilized to identify underground utilities more accurately than general field survey. Considering the replacement of water and wastewater lines and additional drainage facilities anticipated, this SUE work will potentially save us time and headaches during construction. Additional Geotech Borings of $3,500. The additional sidepath from Lodge to Moore on the north side requires borings outside the original project limits. 3 Easement Preparation of $37,200. It was identified after the survey work was completed that there are potentially 31 easements that are necessary for the completion of the project. Staff plans to work with the engineer and see if design changes can be made without the easements. There are some that are necessary for curb ramps at the intersections. A majority of the potential easements fall in an area where the City already has sidewalk that was constructed by the original homebuilder but it was outside the public right of way. A more detailed description of each of the scope changes is provided in the attached Contract Amendment No. 1. Legal Review: The City’s standard construction contract has been reviewed by legal periodically, with changes made as requested. Fiscal Impact: The fiscal impact of this Agenda item is $178,600 for the additional work necessary to design the project. Recommendation: The Engineering Department recommends approval of the proposed Contract Amendment #1 with J. Volk Consulting, Inc. in the amount of $178,600. Parkway Boulevard ReconstructionOriginal Design Contract1/4 Cent Sales Tax Fund, FY 2014ACreated in CIVIL3D1 INCH = 1 MILE0S:\CAD\In_Design\MISC EXHIBITS\dwg\EXHIBITS 2015.dwg\TAX 2014ACreated on: 22 March 2018 by Scott Latta1/31/21 1 INCH = FT.012001200600Parkway Boulevard ReconstructionOriginal Design Contract1/4 Cent Sales Tax Fund, FY 2014ACreated in CIVIL3DS:\CAD\In_Design\MISC EXHIBITS\dwg\EXHIBITS 2015.dwg\TAX 2014ACreated on: 22 March 2018 by Scott LattaTAX 2014ACRACK SEALING ANDSPOT REPAIR2/3TAX 2014AFULL PAVEMENT REPLACEMENTMOORE TO HEARTZ WESTBOUND,ALEX TO LODGE EASTBOUND 1 INCH = FT.0500500250Parkway Boulevard ReconstructionOriginal Design Contract1/4 Cent Sales Tax Fund, FY 2014ACreated in CIVIL3DS:\CAD\In_Design\MISC EXHIBITS\dwg\EXHIBITS 2015.dwg\TAX 2014ACreated on: 22 March 2018 by Scott LattaTAX 2014ACRACK SEALING ANDSPOT REPAIR3/3TAX 2014AFULL PAVEMENT REPLACEMENTMOORE TO HEARTZ WESTBOUND,ALEX TO LODGE EASTBOUND Parkway Boulevard ReconstructionAmended Design Contract1/4 Cent Sales Tax Fund, FY 2014ACreated in CIVIL3D1 INCH = 1 MILE0S:\CAD\In_Design\MISC EXHIBITS\dwg\EXHIBITS 2015.dwg\TAX 2014ACreated on: 22 March 2018 by Scott Latta1/31/2 1 1 INCH = FT.012001200600Parkway Boulevard ReconstructionAmended Design Contract1/4 Cent Sales Tax Fund, FY 2014ACreated in CIVIL3DS:\CAD\In_Design\MISC EXHIBITS\dwg\EXHIBITS 2015.dwg\TAX 2014ACreated on: 22 March 2018 by Scott LattaTAX 2014ACRACK SEALING ANDSPOT REPAIR2/3TAX 2014APAVEMENT REMOVALAND REPLACEMENT 1 INCH = FT.0500500250Parkway Boulevard ReconstructionAmended Design Contract1/4 Cent Sales Tax Fund, FY 2014ACreated in CIVIL3DS:\CAD\In_Design\MISC EXHIBITS\dwg\EXHIBITS 2015.dwg\TAX 2014ACreated on: 22 March 2018 by Scott LattaTAX 2014ACRACK SEALING ANDSPOT REPAIR3/3TAX 2014APAVEMENT REMOVALAND REPLACEMENT ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST PARKWAY BOULEVARD - DENTON TAP TO MOORE DRIVE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS DATE:2/12/2018 ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY.UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST 1 MOBILIZATION 40 STA $8,000.00 $320,000.00 2 TRAFFIC CONTROL 40 STA $4,000.00 $160,000.00 3 EROSION CONTROL & SWPPP 40 STA $6,000.00 $240,000.00 4 PREPARE ROW 40 STA $20,000.00 $800,000.00 5 SAWCUT & REMOVE EXISTING PAVING 19000 SY $6.00 $114,000.00 6 SAWCUT & REMOVE EXISTING SIDEWALK 4700 SY $5.00 $23,500.00 7 REINFORCED CONCRETE STREET PAVING 18625 SY $70.00 $1,303,750.00 8 LIME STABILIZED SUBGRADE 20488 SY $4.25 $87,071.88 9 LIME FOR STABILIZATION (54#/sy)553 TON $220.00 $121,695.75 10 REINFORCED CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVING 1200 SY $76.00 $91,200.00 11 STAMPED CONCRETE PAVEMENT 300 SY $125.00 $37,500.00 12 MEDIAN STAMPED CONCRETE 450 SY $110.00 $49,500.00 13 4" SIDEWALK PAVEMENT (ALL WIDTHS)57000 SF $5.50 $313,500.00 14 BARRIER FREE RAMP 15 EA $3,500.00 $52,500.00 15 REMOVE EX CURB INLET 11 EA $1,100.00 $12,100.00 16 REMOVE 18" RCP 500 LF $16.00 $8,000.00 17 INSTALL 10' CURB INLET 23 EA $4,800.00 $110,400.00 18 INSTALL 4'x4' SDMH 3 EA $7,000.00 $21,000.00 19 INSTALL 18" RCP 1200 LF $160.00 $192,000.00 20 INSTALL 21" RCP 400 LF $165.00 $66,000.00 21 ABANDON EXISTING SEWER LINE IN PLACE 3400 LF $10.00 $34,000.00 22 15" SANITARY SEWER LINE 75 LF $85.00 $6,375.00 23 10" SANITARY SEWER LINE 600 LF $63.00 $37,800.00 24 8" SANITARY SEWER LINE 2100 LF $61.00 $128,100.00 25 6" SANITARY SEWER LINE 625 LF $60.00 $37,500.00 26 INSTALL 4" SANITARY SEWER SERVICE 45 EA $850.00 $38,250.00 27 REMOVE SSMH 9 EA $1,500.00 $13,500.00 28 SSMH 12 EA $5,500.00 $66,000.00 29 SSCO 3 EA $2,000.00 $6,000.00 30 ABANDON EXISTING WATER LINE IN PLACE 4250 LF $12.00 $51,000.00 31 16" PVC WATER LINE 3100 LF $110.00 $341,000.00 32 16" GATE VALVE 14 EA $8,000.00 $112,000.00 33 12" PVC WATER LINE 250 LF $85.00 $21,250.00 34 12" GATE VALVES 1 EA $3,500.00 $3,500.00 35 8" PVC WATER LINE 500 LF $75.00 $37,500.00 36 8" GATE VALVES 12 EA $1,600.00 $19,200.00 37 6" PVC WATER LINE 250 LF $70.00 $17,500.00 38 6" GATE VALVE 2 EA $1,250.00 $2,500.00 39 CONCRETE ENCASEMENT 500 LF $125.00 $62,500.00 40 CONNECT TO EXIST WATER LINES 3 EA $5,000.00 $15,000.00 41 FIRE HYDRANTS 12 EA $3,500.00 $42,000.00 42 REMOVE FIRE HYDRANTS 10 EA $1,000.00 $10,000.00 43 WATER SERVICE 45 EA $3,000.00 $135,000.00 44 DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS 5 TON $5,000.00 $25,000.00 45 TRENCH SAFETY 7500 LF $2.00 $15,000.00 46 PAVEMENT SIGNS AND MARKINGS 40 STA $800.00 $32,000.00 47 ADVANCE PEDESTRIAN WARNING SYSTEMS 2 EA $25,000.00 $50,000.00 Parkway Blvd - OPC Page 1of 2 ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST PARKWAY BOULEVARD - DENTON TAP TO MOORE DRIVE CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS DATE:2/12/2018 ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY.UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST 48 RESTORE PARKWAYS 40 STA $3,000.00 $120,000.00 49 REPAIR, REPLACE, AND/OR MODIFY EXISTING IRRIGATION 40 STA $2,000.00 $80,000.00 50 MEDIAN LANDSCAPE - HERTZ TO LODGE 2,300 LF $160.00 $368,000.00 51 MEDIAN LANDSCAPE - DENTON TAP TO HERTZ 1,100 LF $160.00 $176,000.00 52 NORTH PARKWAY LANDSCAPE - ALEX TO LODGE 1,075 LF $60.00 $64,500.00 53 DRILL SHAFT (RDWY ILL POLE) (24 IN)16 EA $1,300.00 $20,800.00 54 PROVIDE AND INSTALL ROADWAY ILLUM ASSEMBLY (LED) 16 EA $8,500.00 $136,000.00 55 CONDUIT (PVC) (SCH 40) (2") (TRENCH)8000 LF $8.00 $64,000.00 56 GROUND BOX TYPE A 12 EA $750.00 $9,000.00 57 ELEC CONDR (NO. 8) BARE 4000 LF $1.15 $4,600.00 58 ELEC CONDR (NO. 8) INSULATED 8000 LF $1.25 $10,000.00 59 POWER SERVICE PEDESTAL & EQUIPMENT 2 EA $5,000.00 $10,000.00 SUBTOTAL $6,546,092.63 CONTIGENCY (15%)$981,900.00 TOTAL $7,528,000.00 Parkway Blvd - OPC Page 2of 2 TASK START END Engineering Design ‐ 30%2/15/18 5/16/18 30% Submittal 5/16/18 5/16/18 City Review 5/16/18 6/16/18 Engineering Design ‐ 90%6/17/18 9/15/18 90% Submittal 9/15/18 9/15/18 City Review 9/15/18 10/15/18 Plan Revisions 10/15/18 11/14/18 100% Submittal 11/14/18 11/14/18 Bid Package Finalization 11/14/18 12/5/18 Bidding 12/5/18 12/26/18 1st Advertisement 12/5/18 12/5/18 2nd Advertisement 12/12/18 12/12/18 Pre‐Bid 12/19/18 12/19/18 Bid Opening 12/26/18 12/26/18 Council Award 1/16/19 1/16/19 Pre‐Con 1/30/19 1/30/19 Parkway Boulevard Reconstruction Parkway Boulevard Reconstruction AABBCCDDEEHEARTZ ROADCHESTNUT COURTCROOKED TREE COURTKAILEY WAY ENCLAVES COURT ALEX DRIVE PARKVIEW PLACE LO D G E R O A D WILLI N G H A M D R I V E NORTH MOORE ROADPARKWAY BOULEVARD PARKWAY BOULEVARDPARKWAY BOULEVARDPARKWAY BOULEVARDPARKWAY BOULEVARDPARKWAY BOULEVARDPARKWAY BOULEVARDHEARTZ ROAD LOD G E R O A DCL - PARKWAY BLVDEXIST R.O.W.EX. CONCRETE PAVEMENTLC60' R.O.W. (TYP.)EXIST R.O.W.45.0' B-B7.5'4.0'5.0'4.0'8.0'14.0'0.5'14.0'8.0'0.5'7.5'15.0' B.L.15' ALLEY10.0'2.5'2.5'EXIST R.O.W.30'30'EXIST R.O.W.EX. CONCRETE PAVEMENTLC60' R.O.W. (TYP.)EXIST R.O.W.37.0' B-B14.0'14.0'0.5'8.0'0.5'7.5'15.5'15' ALLEY15.0' B.L.10.0'2.5'2.5'EXIST R.O.W.30'30'PROPOSEDCONCRETEPAVEMENTMATCH EX. ELEVATIONSAT OUTSIDE EDGE OFSIDEWALK (TYP.)3.5'PROPOSEDCONCRETESIDE PATH3.0'8.0'6.0'4.0'2.5'2.5'EXISTING SECTION E-ELODGE ROAD TO N MOORE ROADN.T.S.PROPOSED SECTION E-ELODGE ROAD TO N MOORE ROADN.T.S.PROP 5' P.E.PARKINGPARKINGPARKINGPROPOSEDCONCRETESIDE PATHEXIST R.O.W.EX. CONCRETE PAVEMENT23.0' B-B11.0'0.5'LC11.0'88' R.O.W. (TYP.)8.0'0.5'13.0'EXIST R.O.W.8.0'23.0' B-B11.0'0.5'11.0'0.5'13.0'5.0'5.0'4.0'3.0'3.0'4.0'15.0' B.L.88' R.O.W. (TYP.)EXIST R.O.W.23.0' B-BEXIST R.O.W.LC6.0'6.0'8.0'0.5'14.0'0.5'15.0'5.0'4.0'15.0' B.L.16.0' B-B15.0'0.5'7.0'0.5'21.0'8.0'6.0'5.0'PROPOSEDCONCRETESIDE PATHPROPOSEDCONCRETEPAVEMENTPROPOSEDCONCRETEPAVEMENTPROPOSED CONCRETESIDE PATH15' ALLEY10.0'2.5'2.5'15' ALLEY10.0'2.5'2.5'EXIST R.O.W.EXIST R.O.W. EXIST 10' U.E.EXIST 10' U.E.MATCH EX. ELEVATIONSAT OUTSIDE EDGE OFSIDEWALK (TYP.)VARIES (10% MAX)44'44'44'44'EXISTING SECTION D-DALEX DRIVE/PARKVIEW PLACE TO LODGE ROADN.T.S.PROPOSED SECTION D-DALEX DRIVE/PARKVIEW PLACE TO LODGE ROADN.T.S.PARKINGEXISTING SECTION C-CENCLAVES COURT TO ALEX DRIVE/PARKVIEW PLACEN.T.S.PROPOSED SECTION C-CENCLAVES COURT TO ALEX DRIVE/PARKVIEW PLACEN.T.S.EXIST R.O.W.EX. CONCRETE PAVEMENT23.0' B-B11.0'0.5'LC11.0'88' R.O.W. (TYP.)8.0'0.5'13.0'EXIST R.O.W.8.0'23.0' B-B11.0'0.5'11.0'0.5'13.0'5.0'8.0'TYP.7.0'5.0'1.0'±3.0'5.0'3.0'C13.0'EXIST R.O.W.16.0' B-B15.0'0.5'L88' R.O.W. (TYP.)7.0'0.5'21.0'EXIST R.O.W.8.0'23.0' B-B11.0'0.5'11.0'0.5'8.0'8.0'TYP.1.0'±3.0'8.0'5.0'PROPOSEDCONCRETEPAVEMENT4.0'8.0'PROPOSEDCONCRETESIDE PATHPROPOSEDCONCRETESIDE PATHPROPOSEDCONCRETEPAVEMENT10' COMMONAREA (HOA)10' COMMONAREA (HOA)COPPELL AQUATIC &RECREATION CENTERCOPPELL AQUATIC &RECREATION CENTER44'44'44'44'EXISTING SECTION B-BEAST CORE DRIVEWAY TO ENCLAVES COURTN.T.S.PROPOSED SECTION B-BEAST CORE DRIVEWAY TO ENCLAVES COURTN.T.S.EXIST R.O.W.EX. CONCRETE PAVEMENT23.0' B-B11.0'0.5'LC11.0'88' R.O.W. (TYP.)8.0'0.5'13.0'EXIST R.O.W.8.0'23.0' B-B11.0'0.5'11.0'0.5'13.0'5.0'8.0'TYP.7.0'5.0'1.0'±3.0'5.0'3.0'0.5'EXIST R.O.W.23.0' B-B11.0'0.5'LC11.0'88' R.O.W. (TYP.)8.0'0.5'13.0'EXIST R.O.W.8.0'23.0' B-B11.0'11.0'0.5'13.0'8.0'TYP.1.0'±3.0'8.0'4.0'1.0'PROPOSEDCONCRETESIDE PATH4.0'8.0'PROPOSEDCONCRETESIDE PATHPROPOSEDCONCRETEPAVEMENTCOPPELL AQUATIC &RECREATION CENTERCOPPELL AQUATIC &RECREATION CENTEREXIST 10' WALL &LANDSCAPE EASEMENTEXIST 10' WALL &LANDSCAPE EASEMENT 10.0'10.0'44'44'44'44'EXIST R.O.W.EX. CONCRETE PAVEMENT23.0' B-B11.0'0.5'LC11.0'88' R.O.W. (TYP.)EXISTING SECTION A-AHEARTZ ROAD TO EAST CORE DRIVEWAYN.T.S.8.0'0.5'13.0'EXIST R.O.W.8.0'23.0' B-B11.0'0.5'11.0'0.5'13.0'PROPOSED SECTION A-AHEARTZ ROAD TO EAST CORE DRIVEWAYN.T.S.12.0'TYP.±5.0'5.0'7.0'1.0'8.0'TYP.7.0'5.0'1.0'±3.0'13.0'23.0' B-BEXIST R.O.W.EX. CONCRETE PAVEMENT23.0' B-B11.0'0.5'CL11.0'88' R.O.W. (TYP.)8.0'0.5'8.0'EXIST R.O.W.8.0'11.0'0.5'11.0'0.5'13.0'12.0'TYP.±5.0'4.0'1.0'8.0'TYP.4.0'8.0'1.0'±3.0'PROPOSEDCONCRETEPAVEMENTPROPOSEDCONCRETESIDE PATHPROPOSEDCONCRETESIDE PATH10' COMMONAREA (HOA)10' COMMONAREA (HOA)15' COMMONAREA (HOA)15' COMMONAREA (HOA)EXIST. 15' SSEEXIST. 15' SSE44'44'44'44'CL - PARKWAY BLVDPARKWAY BOULEVARD RECONSTRUCTIONCITY OF COPPELL, TEXASJ. V O L K830 Central Parkway East, Suite 300Plano, Texas 75074972.201.3100 Texas Registration No. F-11962c o n s u l t i n gPROPOSED GEOMETRIC LAYOUTHEARTZ ROAD TO NORTH MOORE ROADAUGUST 2017(TC - LEFT)(TC - RIGHT) Engineering Services Parkway Boulevard Reconstruction Page 1 of 3 Contract Amendment No. 1 Engineering Services for Parkway Boulevard Reconstruction PROJECT DESCRIPTION The original scope of the project contemplated reconstruction of existing paving and sidewalks at the same typical sections (widths) and in substantially the same horizontal and vertical locations. The revised scope of the project includes: 1. Variable typical paving sections with differing lane, parkway and median widths (shown as Section A-A thru E-E on geometric layout dated August 2017) 2. Revised horizontal layout and alignment from Hertz to Lodge 3. Addition of full reconstruction from of both west-bound lanes from Hertz to Alex 4. Reduced street width on north side from Lodge to Moore to allow for side path construction 5. Wider sidewalks within project limits (Hertz to Moore). 6. Addition of Pedestrian/Bike Side Path (north side) 7. Addition of Median Lighting (Denton Tap Road to Lodge Road) 8. Addition of Median Landscaping (Denton Tap to Lodge Road) 9. Acquisition of pedestrian/sidewalk easements on the south side of Parkway Boulevard from Lodge to Moore (if required) BASIC SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED J. Volk Consulting (JVC) proposes the following professional services: 1. Basic Services Fee Adjustment The original design fee of $235,000 shall be increased by 10% to account for inflation/labor cost increases between 2015 and 2018. 2. Additional Preliminary Planning a. Prepare and provide “Typical Sections” throughout reconstruction limits for meetings and presentations with city staff and citizens. b. Prepare and provide preliminary Exhibits and Layouts for meetings and presentations with city staff and citizens. c. Attend public meetings for presentation of revised project scope and representation of project to citizens. 3. Design Change – Hertz to Lodge a. Revise limits of reconstruction to add full paving reconstruction of Parkway Boulevard for eastbound lanes from Hertz Road to Alex Drive. b. Revise street layout/sections per traffic analysis and installation of improved pedestrian/bike facilities. c. Addition of side path and wider sidewalks Engineering Services Parkway Boulevard Reconstruction Page 2 of 3 4. Design Change – Lodge to Moore a. Partial street reconstruction for north most westbound lane of Parkway Bou levard between Lodge Road and N. Moore Road. b. Addition of 6’ wide sidewalk on south side of Parkway Boulevard. c. Addition of 8’ wide side-path on north side of Parkway Boulevard. d. Provide appropriate street crossings for pedestrian and bicycle traffic. 5. Median Lighting Prepare and provide construction plans and construction specifications for street lighting improvements within the medians of Parkway Boulevard between N. Denton Tap Road and Lodge Road including: a. Concept design confirmation meeting with City b. Photometric analysis and light level calculation c. Determination of pole spacing d. Design of luminaires, poles, and electric service requirements e. Preparation of construction plans, details, specifications and Opinion of Probable Cost 6. Median Landscaping Prepare and provide design of landscaping and irrigation on Parkway Boulevard between to include: a. Schematic design (30%) including Opinion of Probable Cost b. Construction documents, specifications and bid quantities c. Medians from Denton Tap to Lodge d. North Parkway from Alex to Lodge e. Design shall be based on plans for Freeport Parkway f. Hardscape is limited to concrete mowstrips, decomposed granite and boulders 7. Subsurface Utility Engineering and Analysis a. Provide Level B Subsurface Utility Engineering Analysis within Parkway Boulevard Right-of-Way between Hertz Road and N. Moore Road. i. Use Geophysical Electromagnetic equipment to interpret the presence of the existing metallic subsurface utilities within the proposed project area. ii. Mark ground surface with the appropriate horizontal location of the existing utilities in accordance with APWA/ULCC Uniform Marking Standards. iii. Conduct survey of markings and incorporate into construction plans for reconstruction design, analysis of conflicts, and coordination with franch ise companies. 8. Geotech Report – Additional borings Additional borings based on expanded construction limits. Engineering Services Parkway Boulevard Reconstruction Page 3 of 3 ALT 1. Separate Instrument Easements (if required) Prepare and provide legal descriptions and exhibits for proposed pedestrian easements for the construction of pedestrian improvements outside of City Right-of-Way. This task includes additional field survey and boundary analysis to formally establish r.o.w. location. COMPENSATION Professional Fees for Services shall be as follows: TASK DESCRIPTION FEE ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $293,000.00 Additional Services to be Performed: 1 Basic Services Engineering Design Fee Adjustment $23,500.00 2 Additional Preliminary Planning $8,500.00 3 Design Change - Hertz to Lodge $21,500.00 4 Design Change - Lodge to Moore $16,500.00 5 Median Lighting Design $28,500.00 6 Median Landscaping Design $25,000.00 7 Subsurface Utility Engineering and Analysis $14,400.00 8 Geotech Report - Additional Borings $3,500.00 SUBTOTAL - ADDITIONAL SERVICES $141,400.00 REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT $434,400.00 ALT 1 Separate Instrument Easements (31@$1,200 EA)* $37,200.00 REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT (WITH ALTERNATE) $471,600.00 *IF NEEDED - THIS TASK REQUIRES SEPARATE NOTICE TO PROCEED FROM CITY Agreed and accepted: CITY OF COPPELL J. VOLK CONSULTING, INC. By: ______________________________ By: Jay Volk, PE, President Date: ____________________________ Date: February 21, 2018 Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3838 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3838 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: Parks and Recreation 03/09/2018File Created: Final Action: Kimley HornFile Name: Title: Consider approval of award of a professional services agreement with Kimley Horn, in the amount of $79,500.00, to design signage and pavement markings depicting on-street bicycle lanes for Moore Road, Heartz Road and Riverchase Drive; and authorizing the City Manager to sign all necessary documents. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 19. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Memo.pdf, Map of Proposed Bike Lanes.pdf, Contract.pdf Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 1 Brad Reid 1 3/23/20183/22/2018 Approve 1 Jennifer Miller 2 3/23/20183/22/2018 Approve 1 Christel Pettinos - FYI 3 3/22/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3838 Title Consider approval of award of a professional services agreement with Kimley Horn, in the Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3838) amount of $79,500.00, to design signage and pavement markings depicting on-street bicycle lanes for Moore Road, Heartz Road and Riverchase Drive; and authorizing the City Manager to sign all necessary documents. Summary See attached memo. Fiscal Impact: Funds are available in the CRDC account for this contract. Staff Recommendation: The Parks and Recreation Department recommends approval. Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Brad Reid, Director of Parks and Recreation Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Consider approval of award of a professional services agreement with Kimley Horn, in the amount of $79,500.00, to design signage and pavement markings depicting on- street bicycle lanes for Moore Road, Heartz Road and Riverchase Drive; and authorizing the City manager to sign all necessary documents. 2030: Sustainable City Government Strategy: Excellent and Well-Maintained City Infrastructure and Facilities. Introduction: The 2010 Community Wide Trail Implementation Plan and the 2015 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan recommend on-street bike lanes for Moore Road, Heartz Road and Riverchase Drive. The Moore Road Trail is seen as one of the strongest links between the greatest number of neighborhoods and key destinations such as the Andrew Brown Park system, the extension of the Campion Trail and the future DART Rail Station. Although not dedicated as bike lanes, a striped lane currently exists on both sides of Riverchase Drive. This project would design signage and pavement markings depicting on-street bicycle lanes. Heartz Road will be studied within the scope of this project to create safe routes to school, as well as take advantage of an existing wide street. Fairway Drive from Beltline Road to Riverchase Drive will be studied within the scope of this project as it provides a critical connection to the future Cotton Belt Trail. Analysis: This project consists of the design for signage and pavement markings depicting on-street bicycle lanes with supporting directional signage consistent with the bikeway recommendations of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Each roadway is anticipated to include the following tasks: Task 1: Data Collection, Base Map Development, and Field Observation Task 2: Cross Section Development and Conceptual Layout Task 3: Meetings 2 Task 4: Design Services Task 5: Bidding and Construction Phase Services The following sections for roadways have been identified: Moore Road (from Andy Brown Park to Belt Line Road) – This roadway is identified on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan as a Bike Lane facility. This roadway is approximately 10,000 linear feet. Particular attention will be paid to the following intersections: Parkway Boulevard; Stringfellow Drive; Villawood; Sandy Lake Road; Bethel School Road and Belt Line Road. Heartz Road (from Sandy Lake Road to Parkway Boulevard) - This roadway is identified on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan as a Bike Lane facility. This roadway is approximately 3,000 linear feet. Particular attention will be paid to the Park Valley Drive intersection. Riverchase Drive (from Sandy Lake Road to MacArthur Boulevard) This roadway is identified on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan as a Bike Lane facility. This roadway is approximately 7,400 linear feet. Fairway Drive – (from Riverchase Drive to Belt Line Road) This roadway is not identified on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan but provides a critical connection to the Cottonbelt Rail-to-Trail. This roadway is approximately 1,000 linear feet. There is funding currently identified in the CRDC plan for 2017-18 to have this design completed, followed as quickly as possible with the project bidding, award and installation of the agreed upon scope. Included in this design process is a public input/awareness period that will allow for voices to be heard and necessary adjustments made to the plan. Legal Review: The attached agreement was reviewed and approved by legal counsel. Fiscal Impact: The fiscal impact of this Agenda item is $79,500 Recommendation: The Parks and Recreation Department recommends approval of this item. 1 INCH = FT.0200020001000Proposed On-Street Bike LanesMoore Rd, Heartz Rd andRiverchase Dr, City of CoppellCreated in CIVIL3DS:\CAD\In_Design\MISC EXHIBITS\dwg\EXHIBITS 2018.dwg\PROPOSED BIKE LANESCreated on: 12 March 2018 by Scott Latta1/1AREA OF PROPOSEDON-STREET BIKE LANES kimley-horn.com 801 Cherry Street, Unit 11, Suite 1300, Fort Worth, Texas 76102 817 335 5070 March 12, 2018 John Elias – Park Operations Manager City of Coppell 265 E. Parkway Blvd. Coppell, TX 75019 Re:On-Street Bicycle Lane Design Professional Services Agreement Dear Mr. Elias: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (“Kimley-Horn”) is pleased to submit this letter agreement (the “Agreement”) to the City of Coppell (“Client” or “City”) for providing design for various on-street bicycle facilities. Project Understanding Kimley-Horn understands the City has an adopted bike plan. The City is implementing the plan to install on-street bike lanes and routes. Kimley-Horn understands the following sections for roadways have been identified: · Moore Road (from Andy Brown Park to Belt Line Road) – This roadway is identified on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan as a Bike Lane facility. This roadway is approximately 10,000 linear feet. Particular attention will be paid to the following intersections: Parkway Boulevard; Stringfellow Drive; Villawood; Sandy Lake Road; Bethel School Road and Belt Line Road. · Heartz Road (from Sandy Lake Road to Parkway Boulevard) - This roadway is identified on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan as a Bike Lane facility. This roadway is approximately 3,000 linear feet. Particular attention will be paid to the Park Valley Drive intersection. · Riverchase Drive (from Sandy Lake Road to MacArthur Boulevard) This roadway is identified on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan as a Bike Lane facility. This roadway is approximately 7,400 linear feet. · Fairway Drive – (from Riverchase Drive to Belt Line Road) This roadway is not identified on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan but provides a critical connection to the Cottonbelt Rail-to-Trail. This roadway is approximately 1,000 linear feet. Kimley-Horn understands this project consists of the design for signage and pavement markings depicting on-street bicycle lanes with supporting directional signage consistent with the bikeway recommendations of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Each roadway is anticipated to include the following tasks: Task 1: Data Collection, Base Map Development, and Field Observation Task 2: Cross Section Development and Conceptual Layout Task 3: Meetings Task 4: Design Services Task 5: Bidding and Construction Phase Services Page 2 kimley-horn.com 801 Cherry Street, Suite 1300, Fort Worth, TX, 76102 817-335-6511 Scope of Services Kimley-Horn will provide the services specifically set forth below. Task 1 – Data Collection, Base Map Development and Field Observation A. Data Collection: The City will provide the Kimley-Horn with the following documents/information: ·Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and any associated renderings/concepts for proposed roadways; ·Current bicycle details and specifications (if available); ·Record drawings for projects identified (if available); ·CADD files for current projects identified (if available); and ·City Contacts – The CITY will provide contact information for the applicable CITY staff to be involved with the current projects identified in the Project Understanding. The City will provide the Consultant the most current ArcGIS shapefiles and layerfiles for the following datasets (NAD 83 State Plane, North Central Texas Zone coordinates): ·Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan; and ·Most recent digital orthophotograph (DOQ) of Dallas for the projects identified. B. Base Map Development. Kimley-Horn will create electronic base maps in AutoCAD for each of the roadways. These base maps will be created using aerials and consist of the existing curbs, striping, and signage. The base maps will be verified during the field observation. C. Field Observation - Kimley-Horn will prepare base maps for and attend a two-day long field observation meeting for the four (4) corridors identified in the Project Understanding. During this field observation, Kimley-Horn will conduct field measurements and note signage and striping for each of the roadways identified in the Project Understanding. These field measurements will be used in Task 2 and Task 4. Task 2 – Cross Section Development and Conceptual Layout A. Cross Section Development. Using the data collected in Task 1, Kimley-Horn will evaluate the cross section for bike lane facilities for the roadways identified in the Project Understanding. It is anticipated that the cross sections will included separated (buffer) bike lanes, two-way on-street trails (cycle track), or bike lanes. B. Conceptual Layout. Kimley-Horn will create electronic layouts (roll plots) and prepare preliminary designs for the bicycle marking plans based on schematic field observation (Task 1) for the project corridors identified in the Project Understanding. Kimley-Horn will use the cross sections identified in Task 2 as the basis of the design concept for each facility. Page 3 kimley-horn.com 801 Cherry Street, Suite 1300, Fort Worth, TX, 76102 817-335-6511 The conceptual layout will be reviewed and approved by the City prior start of Task 5. The conceptual layout will be used for meetings (Task 4) and will be considered 60% design. Task 3 – Meetings A. Concept Review Meeting (City Staff). Kimley-Horn will prepare for and attend a meeting with the City to discuss the preliminary concepts. B. Final Design Review Meeting (City Staff). Kimley-Horn will prepare for and attend a meeting with the City to discuss the final preferred concept. C. Miscellaneous Meetings. Kimley-Horn will prepare content for (power point or exhibits) and attend up to four (4) meetings as requested by City staff. Task 4 – Design Services Kimley-Horn will create preliminary design plans (90%) for the bicycle pavement marking and signage plans based on schematic field observation (Task 1) and conceptual layout (Task 2) for the project corridors identified in the Project Understanding. It is assumed that none of the preliminary design plans will require curb relocation or signal modifications as part of this scope. It is assumed that minor survey and ramp/sidewalk maybe needed for spot locations to transition to off-street in up to two locations. The bicycle lane and route pavement marking plans will generally include: · Existing marking and/or marker removal (as needed); · Proposed bike lane/route signing; · General Notes; · Quantities; and · Proposed bike lane/route pavement markings. Kimley-Horn will utilize the following design guidelines: · City design standards; · AASHTO’s Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities; · National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide; · Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (TMUTCD); and · Texas Department of Transportation standards. Following completion of the preliminary design plans (90%), the Consultant will respond to one (1) round of comments. The Consultant will revise the preliminary design plans (90%) based on City comments and submit final design plans (100%). Task 5 – Bidding and Construction Phase Services A. Bidding. Kimley-Horn anticipates that the project will be bid in one bid package. · This includes the printing up to three (3) sets for bidder distribution. The entire plan set will be made available and are anticipated to be distributed electronically. o Final plans Page 4 kimley-horn.com 801 Cherry Street, Suite 1300, Fort Worth, TX, 76102 817-335-6511 o Final contract documents o Final opinion of probable construction cost – Note: Because Kimley-Horn does not control the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, methods of determining prices, or competitive bidding or market conditions, any opinions rendered as to costs, including but not limited to opinions as to the costs of construction and materials shall be made on the basis of its experience and represent its judgment as an experienced and qualified professional, familiar with the industry. Kimley-Horn cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual costs will not vary from its opinions of cost. o Furnishing additional copies of review documents and/or bid documents in excess of the number of the same identified above will be considered as Additional Services · Issue bid documents to prospective bidders · Maintain a list of bidders to whom bidding documents have been issued · Prepare for and conduct a pre-bid meeting with prospective bidders · Issue addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify, or expand the bidding documents · Attend the Bid Opening · Tabulate the bids received and evaluate the compliance of the bids received with the bidding documents. · Prepare a written summary of this tabulation and evaluation together with a letter addressing the award of the construction contract B. Construction Phase Services. Kimley-Horn will prepare for and attend and/or conduct construction coordination meetings for the corridors listed in the Project Understanding. Kimley-Horn will respond to reasonable and appropriate Contractor requests for information (RFIs) and issue necessary clarifications and interpretations of the design plans. Any orders authorizing variations will be made by the City. If requested, Kimley-Horn will conduct site visits to the corridors listed above prior to and during construction. It is anticipated that up to five (5) hours will be needed for each corridor listed in the Project Understanding (20 hours). Kimley-Horn shall have no responsibility for any contractor's means, methods, techniques, equipment choice and usage, sequence, schedule, safety programs, or safety practices, nor shall Kimley-Horn have any authority or responsibility to stop or direct the work of any contractor. Kimley-Horn neither guarantees the performance of contractors, nor assumes responsibility for any contractor’s failure to perform its work in accordance with the contract documents. Services Not Included Any other services, including but not limited to the following, are not included in this Agreement: · Meetings in addition to the ones identified in the Scope of Services above. · Services related to development of the City’s project financing and/or budget. · Services to support, prepare, document, bring, defend, or assist in litigation undertaken or defended by the City. · Performance of miscellaneous and supplemental services related to the project as requested by the City. Page 5 kimley-horn.com 801 Cherry Street, Suite 1300, Fort Worth, TX, 76102 817-335-6511 Additional Services Any services not specifically provided for in the above scope will be provided upon written authorization form the Client, and billed as additional services and performed at our then current hourly rates. Information Provided By Client We shall be entitled to rely on the completeness and accuracy of all information provided by the Client or the Client’s consultants or representatives. The Client shall provide all information requested by Kimley-Horn during the project, including but not limited to the following: existing topographic survey, ROW information, and design parameters. Schedule We will provide our services as expeditiously as practicable within a mutually agreed upon schedule. Fee and Expenses Kimley-Horn will perform the services in Tasks 1 - 5 for the total lump sum fee below. Individual task amounts are informational only. All permitting, application, and similar project fees will be paid directly by the Client. Task 1 Data Collection, Base Map Development, and Field Observation $13,500.00 Task 2 Cross Section Development and Conceptual Layout $ 9,000.00 Task 3 Meetings $11,500.00 Task 4 Design Services $37,500.00 Task 5 Bidding and Construction Phase Services $ 8,000.00 Total Lump Sum Fee $79,500.00 Lump sum fees will be invoiced monthly based upon the overall percentage of services performed. Payment will be due within 25 days of your receipt of the invoice and should include the invoice number and Kimley-Horn project number. Closure In addition to the matters set forth herein, our Agreement shall include and be subject to, and only to, the attached Standard Provisions, which are incorporated by reference. As used in the Standard Provisions, "Consultant" shall refer to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., and "Client" shall refer to City of Coppell, Texas. Kimley-Horn, in an effort to expedite invoices and reduce paper waste, submits invoices via email in an Adobe PDF format. We can also provide a paper copy via regular mail if requested. Please include the invoice number and Kimley-Horn project number with all payments. Please provide the following information: ____ Please email all invoices to ___________________________ ____ Please copy _______________________________________ Page 6 kimley-horn.com 801 Cherry Street, Suite 1300, Fort Worth, TX, 76102 817-335-6511 If you concur in all the foregoing and wish to direct us to proceed with the services, please have authorized persons execute both copies of this Agreement in the spaces provided below, retain one copy, and return the other to us. We will commence services only after we have received a fully- executed agreement. Fees and times stated in this Agreement are valid for sixty (60) days after the date of this letter. We appreciate the opportunity to provide these services to you. Please contact me if you have any questions. Very truly yours, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Jeffrey Whitacre, P.E., AICP, PTP Scott R. Arnold, P.E. Project Manager Assistant Secretary CITY OF COPPELL, TEXAS A Municipality ____________________________________ (Date) (Print or Type Name and Title) (Email Address) , Witness (Print or Type Name) Attachments – Standard Provisions Standard Rate Schedule Page 7 kimley-horn.com 801 Cherry Street, Suite 1300, Fort Worth, TX, 76102 817-335-6511 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Standard Rate Schedule (Hourly Rate) Senior Professional I $240 - $265 Senior Professional II $180 - $250 Professional $160 - $210 Senior Technical Support $115 - $190 Technical Support $70 - $100 Analyst $105 - $175 Support Staff $ 75 - $ 115 Effective July 2017 Rev 01/18 1 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. STANDARD PROVISIONS (1)Consultant's Scope of Services and Additional Services.The Consultant will perform only the services specifically described in this Agreement. If requested by the Client and agreed to by the Consultant, the Consultant will perform Additional Services, which shall be governed by these provisions. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing, the Client shall pay the Consultant for any Additional Services an amount based upon the Consultant’s then-current hourly rates plus an amount to cover certain direct expenses including telecommunications, in-house reproduction, postage, supplies, project related computer time, and local mileage. Other direct expenses will be billed at 1.15 times cost. (2)Client's Responsibilities.In addition to other responsibilities herein or imposed by law, the Client shall: (a) Designate in writing a person to act as its representative, such person having complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information, and make or interpret the Client's decisions. (b) Provide all information and criteria as to the Client's requirements, objectives, and expectations for the project and all standards of development, design, or construction. (c) Provide the Consultant all available studies, plans, or other documents pertaining to the project, such as surveys, engineering data, environmental information, etc., all of which the Consultant may rely upon. (d) Arrange for access to the site and other property as required for the Consultant to provide its services. (e) Review all documents or reports presented by the Consultant and communicate decisions pertaining thereto within a reasonable time so as not to delay the Consultant. (f) Furnish approvals and permits from governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the project and approvals and consents from other parties as may be necessary. (g) Obtain any independent accounting, legal, insurance, cost estimating and feasibility services required by Client. (h) Give prompt written notice to the Consultant whenever the Client becomes aware of any development that affects the Consultant's services or any defect or noncompliance in any aspect of the project. (3)Period of Services. Unless otherwise stated herein, the Consultant will begin work after receipt of a properly executed copy of this Agreement. This Agreement assumes conditions permitting continuous and orderly progress through completion of the services. Times for performance shall be extended as necessary for delays or suspensions due to circumstances that the Consultant does not control. If such delay or suspension extends for more than six months, Consultant’s compensation shall be renegotiated. (4)Method of Payment.Client shall pay Consultant as follows: (a) Invoices will be submitted periodically for services performed and expenses incurred. Payment of each invoice will be due within 25 days of receipt. The Client shall also pay any applicable sales tax. All retainers will be held by the Consultant and applied against the final invoice. Interest will be added to accounts not paid within 25 days at the rate of 12% per year beginning on the 25th day. If the Client fails to make any payment due under this or any other agreement within 30 days after the Consultant's transmittal of its invoice, the Consultant may, after giving notice to the Client, suspend services and withhold deliverables until all amounts due are paid. (b) If the Client relies on payment or proceeds from a third party to pay Consultant and Client does not pay Consultant’s invoice within 60 days of receipt, Consultant may communicate directly with such third party to secure payment. (c) If the Client objects to an invoice, it must advise the Consultant in writing giving its reasons within 14 days of receipt of the invoice or the Client’s objections will be waived, and the invoice shall conclusively be deemed due and owing. If the Client objects to only a portion of the invoice, payment for all other portions remains due within 25 days of receipt. (d) If the Consultant initiates legal proceedings to collect payment, it may recover, in addition to all amounts due, its reasonable attorneys' fees, reasonable experts' fees, and other expenses related to the proceedings. Such expenses shall include the cost, at the Consultant's normal hourly billing rates, of the time devoted to such proceedings by its employees. (e) The Client agrees that the payment to the Consultant is not subject to any contingency or condition. The Consultant may negotiate payment of any check tendered by the Client, even if the words “in full satisfaction” or words intended to have similar effect appear on the check without such negotiation being an accord and satisfaction of any disputed debt and without prejudicing any right of the Consultant to collect additional amounts from the Client. (5)Use of Documents.All documents and data prepared by the Consultant are related exclusively to the services described in this Agreement, and may be used only if the Client has satisfied all of its obligations under this Agreement. They are not intended or represented to be suitable for use or reuse by the Client or others on extensions of this project or on any other project. Any modifications by the Client to any of the Consultant’s documents, or any reuse of the documents without written authorization by the Consultant will be at the Client's sole risk and without liability to the Consultant, and the Client shall indemnify, defend and hold the Consultant harmless from all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including but not limited to attorneys' fees, resulting therefrom. The Consultant’s electronic files and source code remain the property of the Consultant and shall be provided to the Client only if expressly provided for in Rev 01/18 2 this Agreement. Any electronic files not containing an electronic seal are provided only for the convenience of the Client, and use of them is at the Client’s sole risk. In the case of any defects in the electronic files or any discrepancies between them and the hardcopy of the documents prepared by the Consultant, the hardcopy shall govern. (6)Opinions of Cost.Because the Consultant does not control the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, methods of determining prices, or competitive bidding or market conditions, any opinions rendered as to costs, including but not limited to the costs of construction and materials, are made solely based on its judgment as a professional familiar with the industry. The Consultant cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual costs will not vary from its opinions of cost. If the Client wishes greater assurance as to the amount of any cost, it shall employ an independent cost estimator. Consultant's services required to bring costs within any limitation established by the Client will be paid for as Additional Services. (7)Termination.The obligation to provide further services under this Agreement may be terminated by either party upon seven days' written notice in the event of substantial failure by the other party to perform in accordance with the terms hereof, or upon thirty days’ written notice for the convenience of the terminating party. The Consultant shall be paid for all services rendered and expenses incurred to the effective date of termination, and other reasonable expenses incurred by the Consultant as a result of such termination. (8)Standard of Care.The standard of care applicable to Consultant’s services will be the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by consultants performing the same or similar services in the same locality at the time the services are provided. No warranty, express or implied, is made or intended by the Consultant's performance of services, and it is agreed that the Consultant is not a fiduciary with respect to the Client. (9)LIMITATION OF LIABILITY.IN RECOGNITION OF THE RELATIVE RISKS AND BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT TO THE CLIENT AND THE CONSULTANT, THE RISKS ARE ALLOCATED SUCH THAT, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT ALLOWED BY LAW, AND NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT OR THE EXISTENCE OF APPLICABLE INSURANCE COVERAGE, THAT THE TOTAL LIABILITY, IN THE AGGREGATE, OF THE CONSULTANT AND THE CONSULTANT'S OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, AND SUBCONSULTANTS TO THE CLIENT OR TO ANYONE CLAIMING BY, THROUGH OR UNDER THE CLIENT, FOR ANY AND ALL CLAIMS, LOSSES, COSTS OR DAMAGES WHATSOEVER ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY RELATED TO THE SERVICES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT FROM ANY CAUSES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE NEGLIGENCE, PROFESSIONAL ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, STRICT LIABILITY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT OR ANY WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, OF THE CONSULTANT OR THE CONSULTANT'S OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, AND SUBCONSULTANTS, SHALL NOT EXCEED TWICE THE TOTAL COMPENSATION RECEIVED BY THE CONSULTANT UNDER THIS AGREEMENT OR $50,000, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. HIGHER LIMITS OF LIABILITY MAY BE NEGOTIATED FOR ADDITIONAL FEE. THIS SECTION 9 IS INTENDED SOLELY TO LIMIT THE REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO THE CLIENT OR THOSE CLAIMING BY OR THROUGH THE CLIENT, AND NOTHING IN THIS SECTION 9 SHALL REQUIRE THE CLIENT TO INDEMNIFY THE CONSULTANT. (10)Mutual Waiver of Consequential Damages. In no event shall either party be liable to the other for any consequential, incidental, punitive, or indirect damages including but not limited to loss of income or loss of profits. (11)Construction Costs.Under no circumstances shall the Consultant be liable for extra costs or other consequences due to unknown conditions or related to the failure of contractors to perform work in accordance with the plans and specifications. Consultant shall have no liability whatsoever for any costs arising out of the Client’s decision to obtain bids or proceed with construction before the Consultant has issued final, fully-approved plans and specifications. The Client acknowledges that all preliminary plans are subject to substantial revision until plans are fully approved and all permits obtained. (12)Certifications.The Consultant shall not be required to execute certifications or third-party reliance letters that are inaccurate, that relate to facts of which the Consultant does not have actual knowledge, or that would cause the Consultant to violate applicable rules of professional responsibility. (13)Dispute Resolution.All claims by the Client arising out of this Agreement or its breach shall be submitted first to mediation in accordance with the American Arbitration Association as a condition precedent to litigation. Any mediation or civil action by Client must be commenced within two years of the accrual of the cause of action asserted but in no event later than allowed by applicable statutes. (14)Hazardous Substances and Conditions. Consultant shall not be a custodian, transporter, handler, arranger, contractor, or remediator with respect to hazardous substances and conditions. Consultant's services will be limited to analysis, recommendations, and reporting, including, when agreed to, plans and specifications for isolation, removal, or remediation. The Consultant will notify the Client of unanticipated hazardous substances or conditions of which the Rev 01/18 3 Consultant actually becomes aware. The Consultant may stop affected portions of its services until the hazardous substance or condition is eliminated. (15) Construction Phase Services. (a) If the Consultant prepares construction documents and the Consultant is not retained to make periodic site visits, the Client assumes all responsibility for interpretation of the documents and for construction observation, and the Client waives any claims against the Consultant in any way connected thereto. (b) The Consultant shall have no responsibility for any contractor's means, methods, techniques, equipment choice and usage, sequence, schedule, safety programs, or safety practices, nor shall Consultant have any authority or responsibility to stop or direct the work of any contractor. The Consultant's visits will be for the purpose of endeavoring to provide the Client a greater degree of confidence that the completed work of its contractors will generally conform to the construction documents prepared by the Consultant. Consultant neither guarantees the performance of contractors, nor assumes responsibility for any contractor’s failure to perform its work in accordance with the contract documents. (c) The Consultant is not responsible for any duties assigned to it in the construction contract that are not expressly provided for in this Agreement. The Client agrees that each contract with any contractor shall state that the contractor shall be solely responsible for job site safety and its means and methods; that the contractor shall indemnify the Client and the Consultant for all claims and liability arising out of job site accidents; and that the Client and the Consultant shall be made additional insureds under the contractor’s general liability insurance policy. (16)No Third-Party Beneficiaries; Assignment and Subcontracting.This Agreement gives no rights or benefits to anyone other than the Client and the Consultant, and all duties and responsibilities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement will be for the sole benefit of the Client and the Consultant. The Client shall not assign or transfer any rights under or interest in this Agreement, or any claim arising out of the performance of services by Consultant, without the written consent of the Consultant. The Consultant reserves the right to augment its staff with subconsultants as it deems appropriate due to project logistics, schedules, or market conditions. If the Consultant exercises this right, the Consultant will maintain the agreed-upon billing rates for services identified in the contract, regardless of whether the services are provided by in-house employees, contract employees, or independent subconsultants. (17)Confidentiality.The Client consents to the use and dissemination by the Consultant of photographs of the project and to the use by the Consultant of facts, data and information obtained by the Consultant in the performance of its services. If, however, any facts, data or information are specifically identified in writing by the Client as confidential, the Consultant shall use reasonable care to maintain the confidentiality of that material. (18)Miscellaneous Provisions.This Agreement is to be governed by the law of the State of Texas. This Agreement contains the entire and fully integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous negotiations, representations, agreements or understandings, whether written or oral. Except as provided in Section 1, this Agreement can be supplemented or amended only by a written document executed by both parties. Any conflicting or additional terms on any purchase order issued by the Client shall be void and are hereby expressly rejected by the Consultant. Any provision in this Agreement that is unenforceable shall be ineffective to the extent of such unenforceability without invalidating the remaining provisions. The non-enforcement of any provision by either party shall not constitute a waiver of that provision nor shall it affect the enforceability of that provision or of the remainder of this Agreement. Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3839 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3839 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: Parks and Recreation 03/09/2018File Created: Final Action: Trail Master Plan ModificationsFile Name: Title: Consider approval of the modifications to the Trail Implementation Plan as recommended by the Parks and Recreation Board and; authorizing the City Manager to sign the necessary documents. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 20. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Memo.pdf, Trail Appendix.pdfAttachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 1 Brad Reid 1 3/23/20183/22/2018 Approve 1 Christel Pettinos - FYI 2 3/22/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3839 Title Consider approval of the modifications to the Trail Implementation Plan as recommended by the Parks and Recreation Board and; authorizing the City Manager to sign the necessary documents. Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3839) Summary See attached memo. Fiscal Impact: [Enter Fiscal Impact Statement Here] Staff Recommendation: The Parks and Recreation Staff Recommends approval. Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Brad Reid, Director of Parks and Recreation Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Consider approval of adopting amendments to the 2010 Community-Wide Trails Implementation Plan, as recommended by the Park Board, and authorizing the City Manager to sign any necessary documents. 2030: Sustainable City Government: Excellent and Well-Maintained City Infrastructure and Facilities Introduction: The new DART Station in Cypress Waters and the accompanying new alignment of the Cotton Belt Rail Line will impact master planned trails on the south side of Coppell. The proposed amendments to the 2010 Community-Wide Trails Implementation Plan determine the best alternative routes for future trails, as well as coordinate with the new DART Station, DART Cotton Belt Line and the adjacent communities of Grapevine, Carrollton and Irving. Analysis: The proposed amendments to the 2010 Community-Wide Trails Implementation Plan will include four alternative trail alignment locations, the locations are as follows: • Cotton Belt trail crossing of LBJ Freeway: This portion of the trail is the beginning link of the city’s Cotton Belt Trail section as it transitions from Grapevine. The trail will go under the LBJ Freeway and follow along the railroad right-of-way & future DART line until it reaches Coppell Road and turns south to connect with Southwestern Boulevard. 2 • Trail tie-ins to the future Dart Station / Cypress Waters: This trail addition will continue east along Southwestern Boulevard towards Denton Tap/Beltline Road and will tie directly into the proposed DART Station in Cypress Waters. This segment utilizes sidewalks along Southwestern Boulevard and East Belt Line Road in coordination with on-road bike lanes. The trail turns south onto Sanders Loop continuing to the south side of the future DART line overpass. • Trail connection in the MacArthur Blvd / Fairway Drive area: Located on the eastern side of the city, adjacent to the Riverchase Golf Course, this trail will connect the city’s proposed MacArthur trail to the larger regional Cotton Belt Trail. The trail route on the east side of MacArthur will be maintained until it turns east on Riverchase Drive, from there the trail will continue along the north side of Riverchase Drive due to the existing width of the road. The trail can be on-road or a 5 foot sidewalk with a 6 foot shared road bike lane. As the trail goes east, it will stay on the north side of East Belt Line Road. • Cotton Belt connection to Campion Trail: This segment of the trail goes to the eastern edge of the city to connect with the City of Carrollton while crossing over the Elm Fork Trinity River and linking to the regional Campion Trail. This item was presented to the Park Board at their regularly scheduled meeting on March 5, 2018, at which time it was approved unanimously. Legal Review: Agenda item did not require legal review Fiscal Impact: There will be no fiscal impact of this Agenda item Recommendation: The Parks and Recreation Department recommends approval of this item. Making Connections RealityTrail Description:Trail Type:Trail Length:Recommended Trail Width:Type of Surface:Recommended Features:Responsibility of Implementation: Community Trail Approx. 10,564 Linear Feet (2 miles) Varies. 12 feet / 5-6 feet with a road shared bike lane. Concrete Signalized crossing and crosswalk, brick banding or striping, locator map, mile markers, benches, bicycle racks, litter receptacles, dog waste pickup stations, lighting, DART locator City of Coppell - Parks & Recreation, EngineeringConnectivity:Evaluation of Opportunities:Evaluation of Constraints:Trail Master Plan Appendix - Cotton Belt Trail crossing of LBJ FreewayStarting at the western limits of the City of Coppell, this portion of the trail is the beginning link of the city’s Cotton Belt Trail section as it transitions from Grapevine. Closely following Wall St., the trail will go under the LBJ Freeway and follow along the Railroad right-of-way & future DART line until it reaches Coppell Rd. and turns south to connect into Southwestern Blvd. This segment should include a 12-foot wide concrete trail, for both walking and cycling, until it turns east on Southwestern Blvd. At this intersection, the trail would transition to a 5 - 6 foot existing sidewalk for pedestrians and an on road shared bike lane for cyclists.• Part of the larger Cotton Belt Trail and continues the multimodal regional Veloweb. • Follows along the future DART rail line eventually connecting into the proposed Cypress Waters station. • Provides connections to adjacent cities and other DART rail stations.• Gives safe access to Pinkerton Elementary School and the growing residential developments in the area. • Provides additional links between neighborhoods, open space, parks, and other city destinations. • An existing easement and the existing stormwater infrastructure provide opportunities for a 12 foot wide trail. • The area adjacent to the stormwater drainage structure, along the Railroad right-of-way, is relatively clear of trees and large obstacles.• Existing trees and vegetation will provide a linear park feel along Technology Rd. • Connection to the future DART rail station, Cypress Waters.• Additional links from neighborhood sidewalks to the trail system. • Wide drive lanes, an existing turning lane and sidewalk on Southwestern Blvd. • A large stormwater drainage structure could reduce space available for trail alignments and creates potential for security and safety issues.• Additional drainage connecting into the larger concrete stormwater (refer to images 1 and 3 on the following page). • Existing overhead and underground utilities will need to be coordinated with provider.• Additional railroad crossings as the trail goes through the industrial sites before reaching Freeport Pkwy. • Several street crossings at Royal Ln. and Freeport Pkwy. • Land acquisition to fi t the trail in between properties and the Rail Road right-of-way. • Coordination of trail alignment and the proposed DART rail alignment intersections. • Restriping traffi c lanes on Southwestern Blvd. to accommodate onroad shared bike lane.-I1- Trail Master Plan AppendixTrail Master Plan Appendix - Cotton Belt crossing of LBJ Freeway-I2-Drainage structure could reduce space available Drainage structure could reduce space available for trail alignments. Security and safety issuesfor trail alignments. Security and safety issuesExisting drainage paths fl ows under rail line and Existing drainage paths fl ows under rail line and crosses proposed trail alignmentcrosses proposed trail alignmentThe City of The City of CoppellCoppellThe City of The City of Las ColinasLas ColinasThe City of The City of GrapevineGrapevineRoyal LnRoyal LnW Bethel RdW Bethel RdSouthwestern BlvdCoppell RdGrapevine CreekGrapevine Grapevine Springs ParkSprings ParkFreeport PkwyFreeport PkwyTechnology RdCounty Line Rd1-635 / LBJ FwyLBJ FwyLBJ FwyLEGENDPriority Trail (widths vary)Proposed Dart Rail AlignmentArea to be Studied for ImplementationyRyRSouthwestern BlvdSouthwestern BlvdGrapevine CreekGrapevine CreekTechnology Technology CountyCountyCounty Line Rdy Line Rdnty Line RdCountyCountyy Line LineeRdRd1-635 / LBJ1-635 / LBJ1.1.2.2.3.3. Making Connections RealityTrail Description:Trail Type:Trail Length:Recommended Trail Width:Type of Surface:Recommended Features:Responsibility of Implementation: Community Trail Approx. 7,150 Linear Feet (1.4 miles) Varies. 5 - 6 feet with a road shared bike lane / 12 feet Concrete Signalized crossing and crosswalk brick banding or striping, locator map, mile markers, benches, bicycle racks, litter receptacles, dog waste pickup stations, lighting, DART locator City of Coppell - Parks & Recreation, EngineeringConnectivity:Evaluation of Opportunities:Evaluation of Constraints:Trail Master Plan Appendix - Cotton Belt tie-in to future DART StationContinuing along Southwestern Blvd., this portion of the Cotton Belt will tie directly into the trail provided by the proposed DART Station, Cypress Waters. This trail addition will activate the sidewalks and commercial uses along S. Denton Tap Rd., connecting neighborhoods and businesses to the larger city trail network and DART rail systems. This segment utilizes sidewalks along Southwestern Blvd. and E. Belt Line Rd. in coordination with onroad bike lanes. When the trail turns south onto Sanders Loop, new 12 foot wide sidewalks will need to be provided. • Connection to the proposed Cypress Waters DART rail station. • Connections to businesses and neighborhoods along S. Denton Tap utilizing existing sidewalks.• Linnks to neighborhoods, open space, parks and other city destinations and amenities. • Existing sidewalks along Southwestern Blvd. and E. Belt Line Rd. • Wide drive lanes and existing turning lane on Southwestern Blvd. • Existing enhanced street crossings and signals at S. Denton Tap & E. Belt Line Rd.• Connection to the proposed DART station, Cypress Waters, and access to larger network of rail stations and trails.• DART Rail alignment provides opportunities for an underpass without trail traffi c confl icts.• Trail connections to S. Denton Tap Rd. and Belt Line Rd. sidewalks provides access to a larger network of neighborhoods, commercial businesses, and restaurants.• Coordination with neighborhood and commercial buildings to implement trail adjacent to property lines.• Overhead utilities, fencing and North Lake infrastructures will need to be addressed as the trail crosses into the City of Dallas to provide space for the trail and DART Rail alignments.• Major street crossings at S. Denton Tap Rd. and E. Belt Line Rd. • Trail crossing with DART rail alignment will need to be coordinated to provide access to the proposed station.• Separate bike and pedestrian trails due to available right-of-way.-I3- Trail Master Plan AppendixTrail Master Plan Appendix - Cotton Belt tie-in to future DART Station-I4-Adjacent commercial uses to coordinate future Adjacent commercial uses to coordinate future trail widthtrail widthArea of Future DART RailArea of Future DART RailThe City of CoppellThe City of DallasS Denton Tap RdSouthwestern BlvdE Belt Line RdE Belt Line RdProposed Dart StationS Denton Tap RdS Denton Tap RdSouthwestern BlvdSouthwestern BlvdS Belt Line RdS Belt Line RdSanders LoopSanders LoopLEGENDPriority Trail (widths vary)Regional VelowebProposed Dart Rail AlignmentArea to be Studied for Implementation1.1.2.2.3.3.of of The City oThe City oDallasDallasThe City of The City of CoppellCoppelllt Line RBeE dBLnReBeRBRdBelt Line RdBeE E Belt Line RdE Belt Line RdposedPrrodoposedPredoposeProposedroposed nnnnnnnnnnnnnDaDartStaonStationDaDartoDLEGENDPriority Trail (widths vary) Making Connections RealityTrail Description:Trail Type:Trail Length:Recommended Trail Width:Type of Surface:Recommended Features:Responsibility of Implementation: Community Trail Approx. 5,410 Linear Feet (1.02 miles) 10-12 feet Concrete Signalized crossing and crosswalk brick banding or striping, locator map, mile markers, benches, bicycle racks, litter receptacles, dog waste pickup stations, lighting, DART locator City of Coppell - Parks & Recreation, EngineeringConnectivity:Evaluation of Opportunities:Evaluation of Constraints:Trail Master Plan Appendix - Cotton Belt tie-in to future DART StationPicking up where the proposed Cypress Waters DART rail station trail ends, this segment of the Cotton Belt continues the alignments on page I4 and provides access to the proposed DART station from the east side of Coppell. A Bridge crossing will be required at Grapevine Creek and the width of trail may be limited near the creek due potential to grading constraints. After crossing the bridge to the east, an enhanced traffi c signal crossing that leads north to the Grapevine Creek trail. The trail will continue east to connect into the city’s MacArthur trail and city trail network. • Access to the proposed DART station, Cypress Waters, from east Coppell.• Trail link to Grapevine Creek Trail. • Bridge crossing at Grapevine Creek provides new pedestrian access into the City of Dallas.• Connection to future Campion Trail alignment. • Existing enhanced pedestrian crosswalks and signals on E. Belt Line Rd. can be utilized for further connectivity to trails and neighborhoods. • Bridge crossing at Grapevine Creek introduces pedestrian access opportunities for neighborhoods on either side of E. Belt Line Rd. • The setting along Grapevine Creek and the proposed bridge crossing provides a natural trail environment with large existing trees and an opportunity to see a riparian ecosystem.• Connection of intersecting trail alignments in Dallas and Coppell.• Adjacent to residential neighborhoods north of E. Belt Line Rd.• A bridge is required for the crossing of Grapevine Creek on the south side of E. Belt Line Rd. • This trail segment will need to be coordinated with Dallas County, City of Dallas, and DART.• Large existing overhead utilities are present and coordination will be needed with utility provider.• Steep grades due to the proposed trial’s proximity to Grapevine Creek. • Grading and earthwork within the creek’s watershed may need to be evaluated and require further studies. -I5- Trail Master Plan AppendixTrail Master Plan Appendix - Cotton Belt tie-in to future DART Station-I6-Topography constraints at the proposed trail and Topography constraints at the proposed trail and bridge alignmentbridge alignmentLarge overhead utilities at new developmentLarge overhead utilities at new developmentThe City of The City of CoppellCoppellThe City of The City of Valley RanchMoore RdMockingbird LnGrapevine Grapevine CreekCreekE Belt Line RdE Belt Line RdProposed E Belt Line RdE Belt Line RdThe City of The City of The City of The City of Valley RanchValley RanchE Belt Line RdE Belt Line RdkingkingMockMockLEGENDPriority Trail (widths vary)Regional VelowebCommunity TrailBridge CrossingProposed Dart Rail AlignmentArea to be Studied for ImplementationE Belt LE BeltL1.1.2.2.3.3. Making Connections RealityTrail Description:Trail Type:Trail Length:Recommended Trail Width:Type of Surface:Recommended Features:Responsibility of Implementation: Community Trail Approx. 2,170 Linear Feet (0.41 miles) 10-12 feet Concrete City of Coppell - Parks & Recreation, EngineeringConnectivity:Evaluation of Opportunities:Evaluation of Constraints:Trail Master Plan Appendix - Alt. Connection from MacArthur Trail to Cotton Belt Located on the eastern side of the city, this community trail will provide connectivity to both the MacArthur trail and the larger regional Cotton Belt Trail along E. Belt Line Rd. A 10-12 foot trail route will be established within a major utility easement that provides a buff er between a single family residential neighborhood and a retail/commercial development. Following the utility easement’s orientation, the trail will use the wide corridor to meander around the existing utility towers and established vegetation. The trail will cross a utility maintenance road as well as an emergency access road that connects the adjacent residential neighborhood to the retail development. • Linking MacArthur Trail to the Cotton Belt Trail would extend access further south and connect to the Regional Veloweb.• Will activate connections to existing neighborhoods and further the city’s trail network.• A direct route will be created from the MacArthur Trail to the proposed DART station.• Takes advantage of the space available within the utility easement.• Creates a shortcut from the MacArthur trail to the Regional Veloweb.• A park-like setting can be established by implementing a trail that meanders through existing vegetation in the easement.• Along MacArthur Blvd. drainage issues will need to be resolved to prevent fl ooding of the trail.• Coordination with utility companies will be required to implement a continuous trail throughout the utility easement.• Potential confl icts with the rail alignment and existing underground or overhead utilities.• Utility towers may require additional access security and buff er areas.• A pedestrian crossing is required at the emergency access road that connects the retail development and residential neighborhood.-I7- Signalized crossing and crosswalk brick banding or striping, locator map, mile markers, benches, bicycle racks, litter receptacles, dog waste pickup stations, lighting, DART locator Trail Master Plan AppendixTrail Master Plan Appendix - Alt. Connection from MacArthur Trail to Cotton Belt -I8-East side of MacArthur Blvd provides East side of MacArthur Blvd provides suffi cient width for 12 foot trailsuffi cient width for 12 foot trailExisting utilities and a maintenance road Existing utilities and a maintenance road will be considered in the trail alignmentwill be considered in the trail alignmentRiverchase Country ClubRiverchase DrS MacArthur BlvdE Belt Line RdLEGENDPriority Trail (widths vary)Regional VelowebCommunity TrailProposed Dart Rail AlignmentArea to be Studied for ImplementationRiverchase Riverchase Country ClubCountry Clubr BlvdrBlvdCommunity TrailProposed Dart Rail AlignmentArea to be Studied for ImplementationRiverchase DrRiverchase DrE Belt Line RdE Belt Line Rdrthur Blrthur BlSSS MacArthS MacArthSS1.1.2.2.3.3. Making Connections RealityTrail Description:Trail Type:Trail Length:Recommended Trail Width:Type of Surface:Recommended Features:Responsibility of Implementation: Community Trail Approx. 5,230 Linear Feet (.99 miles) Varies. 10-12 feet / 5 feet with a road shared bike lane Concrete City of Coppell - Parks & Recreation, EngineeringConnectivity:Evaluation of Opportunities:Evaluation of Constraints:Trail Master Plan Appendix - MacArthur Blvd. Trail tie-in to the Cotton BeltLocated on the eastern side of the city, adjacent to the Riverchase Golf Course, this trail will connect the city’s proposed MacArthur trail to the larger regional Cotton Belt Trail. A 10-12 foot trail route on the east side of MacArthur will be maintained until it turns east on Riverchase Dr. From here, the trail will continue along the north side of Riverchase Dr. Due to the existing width of the road, the trail will be onroad. This optoin would limit on-street parking to one side of the road, or the trail could be a 5 foot sidewalk and a 6 foot shared road bike lane allowing for parking on two sides of the street. As the trail goes east, it will stay on the north side of E. Belt Line Rd., eliminating a need for a street crossing. Existing enhanced crosswalks will allow for connectivity to the south of E. Belt Line Rd. • Linking MacArthur Trail to the Cotton Belt Trail extends access further south and connects to the Regional Veloweb.• Activate connections to existing neighborhoods and further the city’s trail network. • Allow for the much larger DART rail connections. • Links the neighborhoods of Northeast and Southeast Coppell.• Utilizes the space available adjacent to the golf course.• Wide drive lanes and street parking allow for a pedestrian trail and a shared road bike lane on Riverchase Dr. • Existing street crosswalks and signals would allow access to the trail on both side of E. Belt Line Rd. • Coordination will be required with neighboring apartment complexes to create space for a 10-12 foot wide trail along MacArthur Blvd. • Coordination with the country club and apartments will be required to implement the shared bike lane and potential 5 foot crosswalk along Riverchase Dr. • A street crossing is required at the intersection of Riverchase Dr. and Fairway Dr.• The trail is proposed to cross the existing rail alignment.-I9- Signalized crossing and crosswalk brick banding or striping, locator map, mile markers, benches, bicycle racks, litter receptacles, dog waste pickup stations, lighting, DART locator Trail Master Plan AppendixTrail Master Plan Appendix - MacArthur Blvd. trail tie-in to the Cotton Belt-I10-East side of MacArthur Blvd provides East side of MacArthur Blvd provides suffi cient width for 10 foot trailsuffi cient width for 10 foot trailApartment complex entrance confl icts with Apartment complex entrance confl icts with trail alignment, will need to coordinatetrail alignment, will need to coordinateRiverchase Country ClubFairway DrRiverchase DrS MacArthur BlvdE Belt Line RdRiverchase Riverchase Country ClubCountry ClubyDry DrDDDyy DrDrDRiverchase DrRiverchahse DDrRiverchase Riverchase DrDDrS MacArthrtthhur Bhur BlvBvdS MacArthurArthurBBlrBlvdrFairwFaaawawayFairwayFairwayE Belt Line RdE Belt Line RdLEGENDPriority Trail (widths vary)Regional VelowebCommunity TrailProposed Dart Rail AlignmentArea to be Studied for ImplementationCampion Trail1.1.2.2.3.3. Making Connections RealityTrail Description:Trail Type:Trail Length:Recommended Trail Width:Type of Surface:Recommended Features:Responsibility of Implementation: Community Trail Approx. 3,215 Linear Feet (.61 miles) 10-12 feet Concrete City of Coppell - Parks & Recreation, EngineeringConnectivity:Evaluation of Opportunities:Evaluation of Constraints:Trail Master Plan Appendix - Cotton Belt connection to Campion TrailThis segment of the trail goes to the eastern edge of the city to connect the City of Carrollton while crossing over the Elm Fork Trinity River and linking to the regional Campion Trail. Continuing on the north side of E. Belt Line Rd., this segment will run south of the railroad right-of-way. There is approximately 80 feet between the center of the railroad tracks and the curb along E. Belt Line Rd. allowing for a 12 foot wide trail. This portion of the trail crosses over a drainage channel and the Elm Fork of the Trinity. • A link to Carrollton provides trail access for both Coppell and Carrollton. Provides access to available amenities for citizens. • This segment of the trail completes Coppell’s larger regional Cotton Belt Trail connection within North Central Texas.• Connects a segment of the Regional Veloweb, • The bridge at the Elm Fork of the Trinity River will allow for new pedestrian connections and crossings otherwise unavailable. • A large right-of-way between the back of curb on Belt Line & the railroad track. • Connections to large sports complexes on the east side of Coppell and the west side of Carrollton. • Providing a connection to the City of Carrollton otherwise not permitted by the Elm Fork of the Trinity. • Existing trees and vegetation along a portion of the proposed trail.• No street crossings required.• Elevated trails and bridges will need to be considered as the trail crosses a large drainage pathway and the Elm Fork Trinity River.• Signifi cant grading may be required to work with the drainage patterns along this stretch. • Coordination with the City of Carrollton will be required for the implementation of the Elm Fork Trinity River crossing. • Coordination with property owners and DART to provide safe vehicular and trail crossings at the rail and drive approaches.• Confl icts with utilities and a potential gas line will need to be coordinated with the provider.-I11- Signalized crossing and crosswalk brick banding or striping, locator map, mile markers, benches, bicycle racks, litter receptacles, dog waste pickup stations, lighting, DART locator Trail Master Plan AppendixTrail Master Plan Appendix - Cotton Belt Trail to Campion Trail-I12-Elevated walks and a bridge will need to be con-Elevated walks and a bridge will need to be con-sidered for the trails along Belt Line Rdsidered for the trails along Belt Line RdRail line crossing drive approachRail line crossing drive approachThe City of The City of CarrolltonCarrolltonThe City of The City of CoppellCoppellFairway DrE Belt Line RdW Belt Line RdLine RdWBWBBBBlE Belt Line RdE Belt Line RdLEGENDRegional VelowebBridge CrossingProposed Dart Rail AlignmentArea to be Studied for Implementation1.1.2.2.3.3. Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3848 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3848 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: City Council 03/19/2018File Created: Final Action: 20Next Facilitator/Consultant - Future IQFile Name: Title: Consider approval of a professional services agreement between the City of Coppell and Future iQ for professional facilitation services for the Vision 2040 Strategic Plan; and authorizing the City Manager to sign. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 21. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Vision2040Memo.pdf, FutureIQ Agreement.pdfAttachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: Approval History Action DateVersionSeq #Due DateActionApprover 1 Traci Leach 1 3/23/20183/23/2018 Approve 1 Jennifer Miller 2 3/26/20183/23/2018 Approve 1 Christel Pettinos - FYI 3 3/23/2018 Notified - FYI History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3848 Title Consider approval of a professional services agreement between the City of Coppell and Future iQ for professional facilitation services for the Vision 2040 Strategic Plan; and authorizing the City Manager to sign. Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3848) Summary Fiscal Impact: Funds have been set aside in General Fund Designated Fund Balance for this agreement. Staff Recommendation: Approval recommended. Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Business Prosperity Community Wellness and Enrichment Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council Through: Mike Land, City Manager From: Traci E. Leach, Deputy City Manager Date: March 27, 2018 Reference: Vision 2040 Strategic Plan Professional Facilitation Services 2030: Sustainable City Government: Goal 1 “Excellent City Services with High Level of Customer Satisfaction” Introduction: The Vision 2040 Strategic Planning process will be a citizen-driven process, designed to incorporate a widespread representation of residents, through a number of engagement opportunities, to help shape the vision for Coppell’s future. Facilitation of the citizen input sessions and the ability to stimulate citizens' future-thinking will be critical to the success of the plan. As such, a request for proposals was advertised on January 5, 2018. Eight (8) proposals were received. Staff interviewed the four (4) top-rated firms and selected Future iQ to serve as the professional facilitator for the Vision 2040 Strategic Plan. Future iQ is a management consulting firm specializing in helping organizations and regions plan for the future. Their unique processes and specialized methodology aim to connect emerging regional/national/global trends with Coppell’s specific and unique character and priorities for making strategic shifts that will sustain and enhance our community. The end product will not be a traditional strategic plan, but will instead be a future-oriented strategic vision tailored specifically to preserving what makes Coppell unique. Background: The existing Vision 2030 Plan has been a tool that the Council and staff have utilized to guide the City in its development since the plan’s adoption in 2009. In that time period between 2009 and today, the City has invested over $110 million in improvements to implement components of this strategic plan. However, knowing that the time horizon for the existing plan has just over ten (10) years remaining, it is time to expand the vision for the out another ten years to 2040. To kickstart this process, the City hosted a Citizen Summit in September 2017 to get citizens thinking about the future. Almost 100 residents participated in this exercise. The next step in the process will include more detailed 2 discussions and conversations with as many residents as possible to begin fleshing out what residents see as the future of Coppell. The City's external environment is experiencing many trends that are beginning to manifest themselves, which will have a tremendous impact on our future. Ideas like Smart Cities technology, the Internet of Things, autonomous vehicles, drones, block chain, and many other ideas and concepts are already here or are just beginning to emerge. If we layer those technology changes with the more internal changes that the City is already experiencing, such as changing demographics, approaching build-out, and changing customer expectations, it becomes imperative that the City be in a position to respond to these changes in a timely manner in order to meet the needs of our customers and residents. Future iQ will spear-head the effort to facilitate these discussions in a way that is productive, future- oriented, and representative of the community desires to produce a fresh, new plan that will serve the City for the next ten (10) to twenty (20) years. Analysis: The evaluation criteria included factors such as project approach, project team member qualifications, past project experience, project budget, and project timeline. Future iQ was selected based on their unique project approach that will be transparent and allow citizens to easily track progress; outstanding experience in developing future-thinking plans that are specifically tailored to each city’s specific needs and unique character; staff that lives in the future-thinking world; a robust citizen- focused process that was within budget; and a timeline within the 12-month schedule outlined in the RFP. Legal: The City Attorney has reviewed and approved this agreement. Fiscal Impact: The agreement, as proposed, is within the amount budgeted. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Agreement for Professional Services to Future iQ for professional facilitation services for the Vision 2040 Strategic Plan. - 1 - STATE OF TEXAS § § AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COUNTY OF DALLAS § This agreement (“Agreement”) is made by and between the City of Coppell, Texas (“City”) and Future IQ, (the “Professional”) acting by and through their authorized representatives. Recitals: WHEREAS, the City desires to engage the services of Professional as an independent contractor and not as an employee in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Professional desires to render professional services for the City in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement; NOW THEREFORE, in exchange for the mutual covenants set forth herein and other valuable consideration, the sufficiency and receipt of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: Article I Term 1.1 This term of this Agreement shall begin on the last date of execution hereof (the “Effective Date”) and continue on as needed basis. 1.2 Either party may terminate this Agreement by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice to the other party. In the event of such termination the Professional shall be entitled to compensation for any services completed to the reasonable satisfaction of the City in accordance with this Agreement prior to such termination. Article II Scope of Services 2.1 The Professional shall provide the services specifically set out in Exhibit “A”. 2.2 The parties acknowledge and agree that any and all opinions provided by the Professional represent the best judgment of the Professional. 2.3 All materials and reports prepared by the Professional in connection with this Agreement are “works for hire” and shall be the property of the City. The City shall have the right to publish, disclose, distribute and otherwise use such materials and reports in accordance with the Engineering Practice Act of the State of Texas. Professional shall upon completion of the services, or earlier termination, provide the City with reproductions of all materials reports, and exhibits - 2 - prepared by Professional pursuant to this Agreement, and in electronic format if requested by the City. Article III Schedule Of Work The Professional agrees to commence services upon written direction from the City and to complete the required services in accordance with a work schedule established by the City (the “Work Schedule”). Article IV Compensation and Method Of Payment 4.1 The City shall compensate the Professional for the services by payment of a fee as set out in the schedule attached in Exhibit “A”. 4.2 The Professional shall be responsible for all expenses related to the services provided pursuant to this Agreement including, but not limited to, travel, copying and facsimile charges, telephone, internet and email charges. Article V Devotion of Time; Personnel; And Equipment 5.1 The Professional shall devote such time as reasonably necessary for the satisfactory performance of the work under this Agreement. Should the City require additional services not included under this Agreement, the Professional shall make reasonable effort to provide such additional services at mutually agreed charges or rates, and within the time schedule prescribed by the City; and without decreasing the effectiveness of the performance of services required under this Agreement. 5.2 To the extent reasonably necessary for the Professional to perform the services under this Agreement, the Professional shall be authorized to engage the services of any agents, assistants, persons, or corporations that the Professional may deem proper to aid or assist in the performance of the services under this Agreement. The cost of such personnel and assistance shall be borne exclusively by the Professional. 5.3 The Professional shall furnish the facilities, equipment, telephones, facsimile machines, email facilities, and personnel necessary to perform the services required under this Agreement unless otherwise provided herein. Article VI Miscellaneous 6.1 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the sole and only agreement between the parties and supersedes any prior understandings written or oral agreements between the parties with respect to this subject matter. - 3 - 6.2 Assignment. The Professional may not assign this Agreement in whole or in part without the prior written consent of City. In the event of an assignment by the Professional to which the City has consented, the assignee shall agree in writing with the City to personally assume, perform, and be bound by all the covenants, and obligations contained in this Agreement. 6.3 Successors and Assigns. Subject to the provisions regarding assignment, this Agreement shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the parties to it and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, legal representatives, successors and assigns. 6.4 Governing Law. The laws of the State of Texas shall govern this Agreement; and venue for any action concerning this Agreement shall be in Dallas County, Texas. 6.5 Amendments. This Agreement may be amended by the mutual written agreement of the parties. 6.6 Severability. In the event any one or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not effect any other provisions, and the Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision had never been contained in it. 6.7 Independent Contractor. It is understood and agreed by and between the parties that the Professional in satisfying the conditions of this Agreement, is acting independently, and that the City assumes no responsibility or liabilities to any third party in connection with these actions. All services to be performed by Professional pursuant to this Agreement shall be in the capacity of an independent contractor, and not as an agent or employee of the City. Professional shall supervise the performance of its services and shall be entitled to control the manner and means by which its services are to be performed, subject to the terms of this Agreement. 6.8 Notice. Any notice required or permitted to be delivered hereunder may be sent by first class mail, overnight courier or by confirmed telefax or facsimile to the address specified below, or to such other party or address as either party may designate in writing, and shall be deemed received three (3) days after delivery set forth herein: If intended for City, to: With copy to: City of Coppell, Texas Robert Hager Attn: City Manager Nichols, Jackson, Dillard, Hager & Smith 255 Parkway Blvd. 1800 Lincoln Plaza Coppell, Texas 75019 500 N. Akard Facsimile No. (972) 304-3673 Dallas, Texas 75201 Facsimile No. (214) 965-0010 - 4 - If intended for Professional: ____________ ____________ ____________ 6.9 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed by the parties hereto in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be an original, but all such counterparts shall together constitute one and the same instrument. Each counterpart may consist of any number of copies hereof each signed by less than all, but together signed by all of the parties hereto. 6.10 Exhibits. The exhibits attached hereto are incorporated herein and made a part hereof for all purposes. 6.11 Indemnification. CITY SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY LOSS, DAMAGE, OR INJURY OF ANY KIND OR CHARACTER TO ANY PERSON OR PROPERTY ARISING FROM THE SERVICES OF THE PROFESSIONAL PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT. PROFESSIONAL HEREBY WAIVES ALL CLAIMS AGAINST CITY, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES (COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO IN THIS SECTION AS “CITY”) FOR DAMAGE TO ANY PROPERTY OR INJURY TO, OR DEATH OF, ANY PERSON ARISING AT ANY TIME AND FROM ANY CAUSE OTHER THAN THE NEGLIGENCE OR WILLFUL MISCONDUCT OF CITY. PROFESSIONAL AGREES TO INDEMNIFY AND SAVE HARMLESS CITY FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL LIABILITIES, DAMAGES, CLAIMS, SUITS, COSTS (INCLUDING COURT COSTS, ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS OF INVESTIGATION) AND ACTIONS BY REASON OF INJURY TO OR DEATH OF ANY PERSON OR DAMAGE TO OR LOSS OF PROPERTY TO THE EXTENT CAUSED BY THE PROFESSIONAL’S NEGLIGENCE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT OR BY REASON OF ANY ACT OR OMISSION ON THE PART OF PROFESSIONAL, ITS OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, SERVANTS, AGENTS, EMPLOYEES, REPRESENTATIVES, CONTRACTORS, SUBCONTRACTORS, LICENSEES, SUCCESSORS OR PERMITTED ASSIGNS (EXCEPT WHEN SUCH LIABILITY, CLAIMS, SUITS, COSTS, INJURIES, DEATHS OR DAMAGES ARISE FROM OR ARE ATTRIBUTED TO SOLE NEGILGENCE OF THE CITY). IF ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING SHALL BE BROUGHT BY OR AGAINST CITY IN CONNECTION WITH ANY SUCH LIABILITY OR CLAIM, THE PROFESSIONAL, ON NOTICE FROM CITY, SHALL DEFEND SUCH ACTION OR PROCEEDINGS AT PROFESSIONAL’S EXPENSE, BY OR THROUGH ATTORNEYS REASONABLY SATISFACTORY TO CITY. THE PROFESSIONAL’S OBLIGATIONS UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL NOT BE LIMITED TO THE LIMITS OF COVERAGE OF INSURANCE MAINTAINED OR REQUIRED TO BE MAINTAINED BY PROFESSIONAL UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. THIS PROVISION SHALL SURVIVE THE TERMINATION OF THIS AGREEMENT 6.12 Audits and Records. The Professional agrees that during the term hereof the City and its representatives may, during normal business hours and as often as deemed necessary, inspect, audit, examine and reproduce any and all of the Professional’s records relating to the - 5 - services provided pursuant to this Agreement for a period of one year following the date of completion of services as determined by the City or date of termination if sooner. 6.13 Conflicts of Interests. The Professional represents that no official or employee of the City has any direct or indirect pecuniary interest in this Agreement. 6.14 Insurance. (a) Professional shall during the term hereof maintain in full force and effect the following insurance: (1) a policy of insurance for bodily injury, death and property damage insuring against all claims, demands or actions relating to the Professional’s performance of services pursuant to this Agreement with a minimum combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 Dollars per occurrence for injury to persons (including death), and for property damage; (2) policy of automobile liability insurance covering any vehicles owned and/or operated by Professional, its officers, agents, and employees, and used in the performance of this Agreement; and (3) statutory Worker’s Compensation Insurance covering all of Professional’s employees involved in the provision of services under this Agreement. (b) All insurance and certificate(s) of insurance shall contain the following provisions: (1) name the City, its officers, agents and employees as additional insureds as to all applicable coverage with the exception of Workers Compensation Insurance; (2) provide for at least thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City for cancellation, non-renewal, or material change of the insurance; (3) provide for a waiver of subrogation against the City for injuries, including death, property damage, or any other loss to the extent the same is covered by the proceeds of insurance. (c) All insurance companies providing the required insurance shall either be authorized to transact business in Texas and rated at least “B” by AM Best or other equivalent rating service, or approved by the City Risk Manager. (d) A certificate of insurance evidencing the required insurance shall be submitted to the City prior to commencement of services. EXECUTED this _______ day of _____________________, 20__. City of Coppell, Texas By: Mike Land, City Manager - 6 - Approved as to form: By: ___________________________________ Robert Hager, City Attorney EXECUTED this _______ day of _____________________, 2018. Professional By: Name: Title: - 7 - EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES City of Coppell Coppell, Texas Proposal for the Development of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan RFP: #152 Submitted by: 13 February 2018 Future iQ, Inc. P.O. Box 24687 Minneapolis, MN 55424 www.future-iq.com Contacts: David Beurle david@future-iq.com 612-757-9190 Heather Branigin heather@future-iq.com 612-757-9121 Future iQ, Inc. P.O. Box 24687 Minneapolis, MN 55424 US Federal Tax Number: EIN: 27-1389416 February 13, 2017 Charles Ellis, Purchasing Manager City of Coppell P.O. Box 9478 Coppell, TX 75019 RE: Proposal for Development of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Coppell 20Next Plan Dear Mr. Ellis, Future iQ is pleased to submit this proposal to create a new Vision 2040 Strategic Plan for the City of Coppell. We understand that strategic plans are ‘living documents’ and that this project will require not only alignment with past planning, but a look ahead to the aspirations of Coppell community members for years to come. Future iQ will balance these needs to create a strategic plan that is grounded in city-wide priorities that support and build on the community’s vision, values and goals for the future. Future iQ has a proven track record of designing and implementing customized large and small- scale community visioning and strategic planning projects across rural, urban and regional areas in North America and Europe. With over 400 workshops performed, we have worked hard with local communities to help establish their priorities through visioning and strategic planning processes. Some of the strengths we believe we bring to this project include: • We understand the need for balanced redevelopment. We have worked with many cities, towns, counties and regions at points-in-time when communities have reached generational change, industry tipping points, and other scenarios that involve significant redevelopment phases. For example, our work with the City of Edina in Minnesota involved extensive public engagement with businesses, neighborhood and housing associations, community organizations and individual homeowners as they dealt with issues such as tear-downs and rebuilds, re-purposing commercial properties, and higher density zoning issues. Balancing the need for redevelopment as well as the need to maintain the essential character and charm of a community was crucial in the planning process. Future iQ will bring this sensitivity to Coppell’s strategic planning process. • We specialize in visioning, strategic planning and stakeholder engagement. Engagement is one of the cornerstones of Future iQ’s strategic planning methodology. Our planning process specializes in applying innovative tools and approaches that bring together stakeholders and community members to create unique and cohesive community and economic development plans, and an aligned vision for the future. Importantly, our visioning process provides a collaborative place for participants to share expertise and ideas, and to openly consider various perspectives on issues of concern to their community. We have accomplished facilitators who are well versed in steering community discussions and exploring local sensitivities and aspirations. • We bring a future perspective. Future iQ specializes in studying and understanding larger emergent trends and influences that are re-shaping communities and regions. We have published foresight research on ‘The Next Industrial Revolution, ‘Cities of the Future’, ‘Economics of Collaboration’, the ‘Future of Food’ and the ‘Future of Manufacturing’. We have hosted global Think-Tank forums at Windsor Castle (UK) on ‘Building Sustainable Regional Communities’. This experience helps us shape truly future oriented and visionary planning processes that anticipate the future and educate stakeholders on the broader future challenges we all face. • We understand the power of good data. Future iQ specializes in sophisticated data collection and analysis. We believe that good stakeholder process and data collection, presented in a transparent and interactive manner, can help build rapid alignment around key points of consensus. This enables city leadership to make key decisions and planning actions that are defensible and supported by all voices of the community. Future iQ operates with a high level of integrity and prides itself on its ability to develop and deliver innovative and customized projects that make a lasting contribution. Our high-level engagement, hands-on approach, as well as the effectiveness of our methodology, data visualization graphics and published community-specific reports will help Coppell community members to understand the strategic planning process and their role in making their own future. This thorough understanding of planning is critical, as it will lead to the creation of a vision and strategic plan that can be ‘owned’ by everyone. Our goal throughout this project is to empower your city leaders, stakeholders, and community members with the tools they need to create a future for themselves that is visionary, sustainable, innovative and inclusive. It would be our privilege to work with the City of Coppell on this initiative. Thank you for your consideration. Yours sincerely, David Beurle CEO, Future iQ, Inc. Email: david@future-iq.com Tel: +1 612 757 9190 Table of Contents 1.0 Background on Firm .................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Project Approach/Proposal ......................................................................................... 2 2.1 Phase 1: Initial Planning, Needs Assessment and Schedule .................................................. 3 2.1.1 Initial Planning, Meetings and Schedule ............................................................................... 3 2.1.2 Background Research ............................................................................................................. 4 2.1.3 Benchmark Analysis Report ................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Phase 2: Future Scenarios and Engagement ......................................................................... 4 2.2.1 Pre-Think Tank Surveys .......................................................................................................... 4 2.2.2 City of Coppell Future Think Tank Workshop ........................................................................ 4 2.2.3 Scenarios of the Future Report .............................................................................................. 7 2.2.4 Community and Stakeholder Engagement ............................................................................ 7 2.2.5 Engagement Support Training ............................................................................................... 8 2.2.6 Surveys, Data Collection and Analysis ................................................................................... 8 2.2.7 Data Visualization Platform ................................................................................................... 9 2.2.8 Community and Stakeholder Engagement Report ............................................................. 10 2.3 Phase 3: Draft Coppell 20Next Plan ................................................................................... 11 2.3.1 Think Tank Reconvene ......................................................................................................... 11 2.3.2 Focus Groups ........................................................................................................................ 11 2.3.3 Draft Coppell 20Next Plan Framework ................................................................................ 11 2.3.4 Initiatives and Prioritization Matrix .................................................................................... 12 2.3.5 Road map and Key Measures .............................................................................................. 12 2.4 Stage 4: Coppell 20Next Plan Finalization and Presentations ............................................. 12 2.4.1 Final Coppell 20Next Plan .................................................................................................... 12 2.4.2 Graphs and Visuals ............................................................................................................... 12 2.4.3 Presentation of Coppell 20Next Plan to City Council and Staff .......................................... 13 2.4.4 Community Presentations of Coppell 20Next Plan ............................................................. 13 3.0 Project Team .............................................................................................................. 13 3.1 Project Director, David Beurle, CEO, Future iQ ................................................................... 14 3.2 Juliana Panetta, J.D., Engagement Specialist ...................................................................... 15 3.3 Heather Branigin, Vice-President, Business Development .................................................. 16 4.0 Past Projects .............................................................................................................. 17 4.1 Six Similar Projects with References ................................................................................... 17 4.1.1 City of Edina, Minnesota (2017 and 2014-2015) ................................................................. 17 4.1.2 Allen County, Ohio (2016-2017 and 2015) .......................................................................... 18 4.1.3 Moosehead Lake Regional Plan, Maine (2016-2017) .......................................................... 18 4.1.4 Texarkana, Texas (2015) ...................................................................................................... 19 4.1.5 New Hampshire Aerospace and Defense Consortium, New Hampshire, (2017-2018) ...... 19 4.1.6 Community Action Partnership of Hennepin County, Minnesota (2017) .......................... 19 4.2 Relevant Projects ............................................................................................................... 20 4.2.1 Town of Hilton Head Island, South Carolina (2016-present) .............................................. 20 4.2.2 City of San Diego, California (2016-present) ....................................................................... 20 4.2.3 Rural Community Assistance Partnership, Washington, D.C. (2018-present) ................... 20 4.2.4 B.E.S.T. of Waseca County, Minnesota (2016-present) ...................................................... 20 4.2.5 City of Wayzata, Minnesota (2017-present) ....................................................................... 21 4.2.6 Katahdin Collaborative, Maine (2018-present) ................................................................... 21 4.2.7 Oshkosh Initiative, Wisconsin (2014-2016) ......................................................................... 21 4.2.8 Mediterranean Ports Project, Italy/France (2015) .............................................................. 21 4.3 Additional Relevant Experience ......................................................................................... 22 4.4 Foresight Experience .......................................................................................................... 24 5.0 Project Timeline ......................................................................................................... 26 6.0 Cost Proposal ............................................................................................................. 27 7.0 Conflict of Interest Questionnaire .............................................................................. 27 City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 1 1.0 Background on Firm Future iQ was founded in 2003, and specializes in the field of community and economic planning and development, with a special focus on municipal, industry, and regional economic development, visioning, strategic planning and engagement. Future iQ operates across three continents with seven staff members, three country representatives and four strategic partners located worldwide. In the United States, the company is currently undertaking (or has recently completed) a portfolio of projects in Texas, Ohio, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Nebraska, Oregon, Maine, Washington, D.C., California, S. Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, Washington and New Hampshire. Future iQ operates with a high level of integrity and seeks to serve our clients by delivering innovative and customized projects that make a lasting contribution. Our goal is to help our clients plan for the future based on the collective values, goals and priorities specific to each community. Global Presence – Local Solutions Future iQ specializes in the following functional and sector areas: Future iQ’s specialized methodology includes: • City, Urban and Regional Planning • Community Engagement • Economic and Workforce Development • Strategic Planning and Visioning • Non-profit Strategic Planning • Network and Supply Chain Mapping • Defense Sector Engagement • Data Visualization • Organizational and Corporate Planning • The Future Game • Tourism Industry Planning and Analysis • Customized Foresight Research Please refer to www.future-iq.com for more detail. City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 2 2.0 Project Approach/Proposal Future iQ brings a global perspective to visioning and strategic planning that is invaluable to local interests. For the City of Coppell, this means access to a wealth of knowledge and experience in the development of economic and strategic planning for cities, counties, regions, nonprofits and global corporations. Future iQ will use this experience to guide and inform this project and will work with City staff to develop comprehensive, future-oriented, sustainable and implementable strategies to support the new Coppell 20Next Plan. These strategies will balance priorities across the important dimensions specific to the City of Coppell and incorporate global and local best practices. Future iQ believes this project is an opportunity for the City of Coppell to create an innovative Strategic Plan that will support and guide its community well into the future. Building off the City’s past and recent significant planning efforts and historical context, Coppell leadership has a wonderful opportunity to lead its community into a planning phase that will define the City for the next decades. The challenges of costs, funding, staffing and program coordination can be daunting, but the opportunities to better serve and provide leadership to the community will strengthen the driving force of the City as it pursues its long-term goals through its Strategic Plan. Any long-term vision for the City of Coppell must be seen through the lens of its vision and strategic planning and this will lead to the development of an inclusive and sustainable plan that will guide the town for years to come. Drawing on previous experience, we believe that the best way to produce a successful strategic plan is by using a customized, people-focused, scenario-based methodology supported by data. The informed bottom-up driven approach proposed is inclusive and integrates values and quality of life perspectives that are intrinsic to long-term cohesive city-specific planning. Future iQ anticipates the duration of this project to be approximately 11 months, from March 2018 – January 2019. This timeframe is flexible depending on the needs of Coppell. The Project Director will monitor the project with City staff and make on-site visits to attend meetings, host key workshops, and present a final status report. The additional Future iQ team members will assist with project research, reports and engagement sessions. The proposed project plan and production of deliverables are divided into four phases described and illustrated in the project process plan diagram below. All key areas of work and deliverables outlined in the RFP will be included in the scope of work and incorporated into the following phases. Phase One: Initial Planning and Background Research Phase Two: Future Scenarios and Engagement Phase Three: Draft Coppell 20Next Plan Phase Four: Coppell 20Next Plan Finalization and Presentations The scope of work outlined below will extend well beyond the traditional SWOT analysis and comprehensive planning, and will look more broadly at the City’s potential future and its City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 3 implications. The process will help to define a broad community vision, objectives and directions, using a collaborative process and multiple engagement techniques. 2.1 Phase 1: Initial Planning, Needs Assessment and Schedule 2.1.1 Initial Planning, Meetings and Schedule This project will begin with meetings between Future iQ team members and City staff to establish a final work program and schedule specifying the number and type of planned meetings to occur throughout the project. This would include a detailed schedule and process for the project, and a review of the nature, quality, and format of reports to be produced. The schedule and process for the project will be clearly stated, compelling and implementable. Initial stakeholder interviews and meetings will be held to build rapport and a better understanding of the prevailing City dynamics, concerns, issues, and expectations. City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 4 2.1.2 Background Research Working closely with City staff, our team will conduct relevant background research, including the exploration of existing planning efforts in order to understand those strategic directions already established for the city, as well as to identify progress made towards meeting these objectives. 2.1.3 Benchmark Analysis Report This analysis report will provide an up-to-date City profile in conjunction with city and issue comparisons that are used as reference throughout the strategic planning process. To see a similar report (Benchmark Analysis) please visit: http://future-iq.com/project/city-wayzata- minnesota-usa-2017/ or http://future-iq.com/project/vision-edina/ 2.2 Phase 2: Future Scenarios and Engagement 2.2.1 Pre-Think Tank Surveys Future iQ will work closely with City staff prior to the Coppell Future Think-Tank Workshop to develop a Pre-Think Tank survey involving research of relevant local, regional and macro trends. The survey will explore participant perceptions about the future, perceived areas of opportunity and threat, views about changes occurring in the city and future risk. A summary report will be provided to the City before the Think Tank. 2.2.2 City of Coppell Future Think Tank Workshop Future iQ’s unique approach to visioning and community engagement focuses on scenario- based strategic planning and stresses the role of future-thinking to identify shared interests, values and common concerns. Working with core representatives and invited community members and stakeholders identified by City staff, the scenario Think Tank planning process develops a series of plausible futures. It provides a robust framework to test proposed strategies and assumptions, and a ‘testing ground’ for planning, particularly in complex or changing communities. These sessions bring together local community members and provide an important forum for discussion and planning about the next 5-20 years. The Think Tank process will help to define a broad community vision, objectives and directions, using a collaborative process and multiple engagement techniques. This would be conducted as a highly participatory 8-hour workshop held over the course of one day or two evenings, and would include 70-90 key representative stakeholder and community participants. The workshop program includes: • Review of important trends, background research and stakeholder networks. • Identification of key drivers shaping the future and clustering of critical sets of drivers. City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 5 • Formulation of different plausible scenario ‘spaces’. Developing detailed narratives and descriptions about each scenario. • Examining the impact and consequences of each scenario on various aspects of the City of Coppell. • Identifying preferred futures and critical actions steps. For Coppell, the scenario-based Future Think Tank Workshop will be a tool to gain better understanding of community priorities and resource allocation particularly in the areas of community and economic development. Scenario Planning is a method that is used to develop plausible scenarios for the future. There are several key criteria needed: • Strong collaborative approach. The long-term success of this project will be dependent on building strong collaboration among the City’s various stakeholders and community members. The development of this type of ‘eco-system’ needs to be built in upfront in the planning stages of the project with a conscious effort to build on points of consensus to create a common vision for the City. The Project Director will work with City staff to engage as many community members and stakeholders as possible in the planning process. • Future oriented. Building a community-wide shared vision of the future will be critical for the City of Coppell. In order to develop an agreed-upon strategic plan, community members and stakeholders will need clarity and a common understanding of the drivers impacting the City and the region. • Data driven approach, including data visualization. Our experience suggests that projects like this are most successful when built on transparent data-driven approaches, inclusive of as many community members and stakeholders as possible. • Project management and communication strategy. Building the systems and communication methods to ensure compliance and timely delivery are important features of our project management. As specified in the RFP, we will also provide at a minimum, monthly written updates to City Staff. Future iQ team members will work throughout the duration of the project to update and keep current the project information distributed to stakeholders and community members. It is our firm belief that consistent and easily accessible project communications add to the transparency of the process and encourage community participation. Scenarios are not predictions, but are a way of exploring plausible futures. The methodology expands on traditional strategic planning in that it allows the exploration of many factors, or drivers of the future at the same time. This is done by using local knowledge and expectations about the drivers to produce a framework that defines and explores a range of plausible futures. This enables people to explore the impacts and consequences of a range of different future paths as they seek a preferred future. The key aspects and features of the approach include: • It is customizable and built around the work program defined in this proposal. City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 6 • It is data and evidence-based, ensuring a robust outcome, and a vision and plan that deals with reality, rather than a ‘wish-list.’ • Community engagement is front and center in the design, and all stakeholders have the option to have input via multiple methods. • The process is inclusive and easily scalable, and can draw input from all sections of the community - from backyards to classrooms to boardrooms. • Outputs include high quality reports, data analysis and presentations where stakeholder input is valued and reflected in the final outcomes. Below is the visual outline of how the scenario-based strategic planning process works: We believe this process is trying to answer important questions such as: • What should the City of Coppell become? • How will community preferences fit into this vision? • How does the City of Coppell ensure that planning for the future will incorporate values and quality of life issues for all community members served? • How should public funds be invested and leveraged to improve the City? City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 7 In addition, we believe that we can use the opportunity of the strategic planning process to further examine the circumstances identified in the RFP including: • What are the specific strategic gap and growth areas for the City and does previous planning address those areas? • How does the community of Coppell want to redevelop existing spaces to accommodate future growth? • How may financial/budgetary issues at the State level impact the City and how can the City prepare for potential budget challenges? • Where does Coppell fit into the world, and what are its unique competitive strengths? • How does the City anticipate and take advantage of emerging trends in the economy, Country, and aspirations of community members? • What hurdles might Coppell face, and how do we build collaborative approaches and structures to ensure continued successful programs? • Where is there opportunity or need to evolve or change? Where is there an appetite for change, and where might there be resistance to change? • What is the story Coppell community members want to tell about themselves and what do they want to be in the future? The methodology being proposed will allow Coppell stakeholders and community members to tackle these questions in an engaging and thought-provoking manner. This will then lead to the clarification of priorities and actions that will define a clear road map for the Strategic Plan. 2.2.3 Scenarios of the Future Report Following the Think-Tank, Future iQ will prepare a detailed workshop report with outcomes and scenario analysis, together with survey results and key recommendations. This material provides the basis for the broader community engagement phase and ultimately identification of the preferred future (strategic vision) for the City of Coppell. To see a sample ‘Scenarios for the Future’ Report, please visit: http://future-iq.com/project/vision-edina/ 2.2.4 Community and Stakeholder Engagement Following the Think-Tank workshop, the broader public engagement will begin in earnest. This is the stage where groups not commonly involved in community activities will be sought out with the assistance of city staff and other groups. The extent of this engagement will be determined in close consultation with City staff and we will seek to build off Coppell’s recent Citizen Summit by incorporating issues of importance highlighted through the Think Tank process. The following face-to-face engagement approaches may be used: • Focus groups and/or workshops • Larger town hall-style meetings as well as small-group meetings • Housing Association / Community groups / Sector workshops / High-school aged groups City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 8 • Intercept surveys • Interviews with stakeholders The Community-wide forums, focus groups and/or workshops will include: • Introduction to the project • Outline and discussion of key issues and trends • Outline of the scenarios developed by the Think-Tank group • Discussion about potential implications and impacts of each scenario on the target workshop groups or stakeholders • Completion of detailed input survey It is anticipated that approximately 20-25 targeted workshops will be held, providing access to a cross-section of community members and stakeholders. The workshops are typically 1.0 to 1.5 hours, and include about 20 minutes to complete a comprehensive Community and Stakeholder Survey (described in Section 2.2.6) Future iQ has allocated time on-site for detailed work presentations and stakeholder engagement. Our team will facilitate these focus groups, workshops and interviews. In our experience, an additional successful engagement strategy may also involve a locally trained team made up of City staff or volunteers willing to go out into the community to engage local citizens in the visioning process. This added City involvement creates a collaborative environment between local government and citizens that can add to the success of the visioning process. This idea is further explored in Section 2.2.5 and is presented as an ‘optional’ element to this process plan as not all city budgets are able to commit the resources towards this option. 2.2.5 Engagement Support Training Future iQ’s engagement support training is an optional element to the visioning and strategic planning process. We have found that this engagement usually creates a highly collaborative environment between and City and its citizens during the process and encourages participation by community members and stakeholders. The Project Director will train the volunteers in a training session at the beginning of the engagement process. A PowerPoint along with handout materials will be provided to the volunteers to use during their presentations. 2.2.6 Surveys, Data Collection and Analysis Data collection from as many community members and stakeholders as possible will provide an inclusive process and a comprehensive understanding of community and stakeholder views and where points of consensus lie. Following the Think-Tank, Future iQ will prepare a detailed Community and Stakeholder Vision Survey that will be made available community-wide through various communications efforts. Hard copy surveys will be available at the community workshops and events and we will also provide an online Community and Stakeholder Vision City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 9 Survey option to allow for broad based participation into the process. In all cases, expertly designed survey instruments will capture community and stakeholder perspectives, visions and priorities. The surveys will examine appetite for change, and sensitivity to a range of future shaping themes, identified in the Think-Tank process. 2.2.7 Data Visualization Platform Using Future iQ’s online Lab Portal, the survey results will be collected and presented in an innovative and interactive data visualization platform. This will allow community members and stakeholders to examine the data collected from surveys themselves, explore levels of alignment or divergence around key topics, and selectively filter to view perspectives from their own sector, or other profile category. Examples of such an interactive data visualization developed by Future iQ can be viewed at http://lab.future-iq.com. This approach provides a fun and interactive way to give transparent feedback to participants while at the same time exploring issues and views across the community. Future iQ developed this platform to provide a people-focused, data-driven approach to visioning and key issue analysis. The following image shows an example of the screen shot of the ‘point of consensus’ in an example project. The dots represent groups of community members and where their preferred future was located relative to a range of choices within the scenario matrix. The point of consensus will move depending on the search filters selected, allowing for an engaging and interesting way to explore the various views of different cohorts and groups within the community. For the City of Coppell, we would set filters based on profile questions such as age, length of time living or working in the City, living location area, gender, ethnic background, etc. Sample Data Visualization City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 10 Example of data visualization platform page The following screen shot shows responses, from an example project, to one of the key slider sensitivity questions. Again, it shows how this can be filtered and explored. This approach to data collection and visualization allows extra insight to be gathered from the community surveys. 2.2.8 Community and Stakeholder Engagement Report In addition to the quantitative analysis, each Community and Stakeholder Vision Survey is accompanied by an open-ended response section. The qualitative responses will be analyzed, allowing us to explore community member and stakeholders’ perspectives more deeply on key issues or topics. Based on stakeholder engagement process, we will prepare a Community and Stakeholder Engagement Report, which will provide a detailed analysis of the project’s City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 11 community and stakeholder views and desires for the future. For an example of this type of report, please see the following link: http://future-iq.com/project/vision-edina/ 2.3 Phase 3: Draft Coppell 20Next Plan 2.3.1 Think Tank Reconvene To validate the planning process, the Project Director will reconvene the original Coppell Future Think Tank participants. At this second workshop, the group will revisit results from the first Think Tank and incorporate the results from the expanded community engagement to establish priorities for the final Strategic Plan. These initiatives and priorities will be produced in the form of a prioritization matrix and will provide the basis for the Roadmap and key measures to be presented as part of the final Strategic Plan document. This workshop will seek to foster a sense of cohesion and alignment going forward by allowing participants the opportunity to validate the final vision, strategic direction and findings for the City. 2.3.2 Focus Groups Future iQ will convene 1-3 Focus Groups to finalize strategic priorities and action areas to be included in the draft strategic plan document. Future iQ will also use the focus groups to facilitate the translation of the conceptual goals of the visioning process into realistic, achievable targets to be incorporated into the strategic plan. The Coppell 20Next Plan will be a working document with the understanding that it must be adaptable to current conditions over time including considerations for the next planning process. 2.3.3 Draft Coppell 20Next Plan Framework Future iQ will compile all reports and results of research, engagement, and analysis from Phases 1, 2 and 3 into an initial draft of the strategic plan framework containing the final agreed-upon strategic direction for the City. The City staff will be invited to review the draft, and input and comments will be incorporated. As specified in the RFP, Future iQ will provide a digital PDF file of the draft. In addition to items discovered in the initial planning and engagement processes, the framework will include the following elements: • Introduction • Forward (optional) • Community Snapshot • Community and Stakeholder Analysis • Key Findings • Strategic Action Plan Framework • Initiatives and prioritization matrix (see section 2.3.4) • Roadmap and Measures (see section 2.3.5) • Opportunities and Risks City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 12 • Looking Ahead: Topics for the Future • Considerations for the next planning process and unanticipated constraints 2.3.4 Initiatives and Prioritization Matrix Based on the information gathered for the draft strategic framework, Future iQ will work closely with City staff to synthesize the information to generate an initiative and priority project matrix. These initiatives and priorities will be produced in the form of a prioritization matrix and will provide the basis for the strategic roadmap to be presented as part of the final Strategic Plan document. It is at this point that one of the focus group sessions from Section 2.3.2 may be held to get feedback on the draft Plan and to gain insights on a realistic timeline for the road map and key measures. 2.3.5 Road map and Key Measures Using the draft strategic plan framework content, Future iQ will prepare a strategic road map for the Coppell 20Next Plan. The road map will recommend a course of action along a timeline to implement the Strategic Plan including measures that will monitor the City’s progress along the way. The Coppell 20Next Plan will be a working document with the understanding that it must be adaptable to current conditions over time including considerations for the next planning process. 2.4 Stage 4: Coppell 20Next Plan Finalization and Presentations 2.4.1 Final Coppell 20Next Plan The Coppell 20Next Plan document will include full integration of all reports, research, engagement and analysis. This will incorporate the proposed data analyses, vision and plan framework and provide recommended strategies and rationale for policy development, long- term investments and resource allocation to build on and complement recent planning efforts. Individual components of the plan will have been generated in Phases 1, 2, and 3, and deliverables from these earlier phases will have been available for comment from the City Council and Staff, community members and stakeholders. The City Manager and/or City Council will also be invited to write a Forward or ‘Letter to the Community’ about the planning process and what it means for the City of Coppell. For an example of this type of Forward, please see the NHADEC Strategic Action Plan at http://future-iq.com/project/aerospace- defense-export-consortium-strategy-development-new-hampshire-usa-2017/. 2.4.2 Graphs and Visuals Future iQ will create visual elements and graphics reflecting the City’s community ideas and options supporting the final Strategic Plan. Future iQ will also provide professionally created City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 13 streetscape renderings to illustrate potential development for the community. This will provide a strong visual narrative of the future vision and desired and potential strategic plan outcomes. 2.4.3 Presentation of Coppell 20Next Plan to City Council and Staff The final Strategic Plan will be presented in person by the Project Director to the City’s Council at a regularly scheduled Council meeting. The timing of this final step will be determined with City staff in the initial project meetings and discussions. 2.4.4 Community Presentations of Coppell 20Next Plan As a final community engagement step in the strategic planning process, the Project Director will host three community forums with City representatives to present the Coppell 20Next Plan to community members and stakeholders. This step will support the City’s stated desire to place a high priority on citizen participation and communication throughout the planning process. 3.0 Project Team The Future iQ team presented in this proposal have significant experience working on community engagement and planning projects. The team has worked with large-scale engagement sessions, with up to 800 participants at a single session, as well as smaller-scale sessions that have taken place in libraries and community-member homes. We recognize that this project requires significant periods for intensive workloads and our team availability will allow sufficient team resources to be deployed, both on-site and for data analysis and report preparation. The proposed team members are an experienced and reliable team. The team skills are complementary, with a mix of required skills in: • Highly developed critical thinking capacity in the areas of organization design, strategic planning and collaboration building • Detailed practical experience in research, stakeholder engagement, economic and data analysis and data visualization • Project management and stakeholder workshop facilitation, including extensive experience in visioning, economic and workforce development, industry cluster development, economic analysis and impacts research and supply-chain analysis All team members are confirmed to be available for the time frames and delivery as outlined in this response and will be directly accountable to Project Director David Beurle, CEO, Future iQ (davidbeurle.com). City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 14 3.1 Project Director, David Beurle, CEO, Future iQ RÉSUMÉ EDUCATION Bachelor Degree in Agricultural Science, University of Sydney, 1984 EMPLOYMENT Founder and CEO Future iQ, USA and Europe, 2003 – Present Principal Adviser, Minister for Primary Industries, Western Australia, 1991 – 2000 Rangeland Scientist, Western Australian Department of Agriculture, 1985-1991 PHILANTHROPIC WORK Board Director, Western Australian Community Foundation, 2003-2005 DAVID BEURLE, b.sc. agr c.e.o. future iq As founder and CEO of Future iQ, David is an expert in creating future planning approaches for use in regional, industry and organizational settings. He has pioneered the application of scenario planning with regions, regional industries and corporations around the world. David created the Future Game, a widely used planning and workshop tool that has been used in over 500 workshops across 10 countries. As CEO of Future iQ, David has led global projects across 4 continents and has written and contributed to a number of foresight papers. Having worked in the ﬁeld of organizational and regional economic and community planning for over 20 years, his work has won numerous awards. David has a major role in Future iQ’ projects as lead consultant and director of projects. RECENT PROJECT EXPERIENCE • Snohomish County, Washington, Tourism Implementation Plan 2017 • City of San Diego Defense Industry Economic Development Plan, California, US, 2016 - 2017 • Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, Community Visioning project, 2016 - 2017 • Task Force LIMA Defense Initiative, Ohio, US, 2015 - 2017 • National Congress of American Indians, Future Game development, 2016-18 • Moosehead Lake Regional Master Plan, Maine, US, 2016 - 2017 • Edina Economic Development Plan, Minnesota, US, 2016 • Oregon Regional Tourism Planning US, 2015 - 2016 • Columbia River Gorge, Oregon, US, 2015 - 2016 • Griffith Foods Scenario Planning Chicago, US, 2016 • Mediterranean PORTS EU Projects Italy/France, 2015 • Fox Valley Defense Industry Adjustment, Wisconsin, US, 2014 - 2015 • Texarkana Defense Project, Texas, US, 2015 • Vision Edina, Minneapolis, US, 2014 - 2015 • Australian Grain Research and Development Corporation, Western Australia, 2008 - 2015 • Vadinia Project, Leon, Northern Spain, 2014 • Agriparco Montespertoli, Tuscany, Italy, 2014 • Govt. of Alberta Small Business Strategy, Canada, 2013 • Steering it Forward North East Nevada, US, 2013 • Mount Pierre Project, Australia, 2013 • Kewaunee Economic Adjustment Project, Wisconsin, US, 2013 • Global Think Tank, Windsor Castle, UK, 2012 • Future West Cork, Ireland, 2009 - 2012 • Palliser Futures Project, Alberta, Canada, 2009 • Winnemucca Futures Project Nevada, US, 2009 RECENT PUBLICATIONS • The Next Industrial Revolution, 2017 • The Future of Manufacturing, 2016 • The Future of Food, 2016 • Economics of Collaboration, 2015 • Cities of the Future, 2015 • Building Sustainable Regional Communities, Windsor Castle, UK, 2012 • The Futures Game: A Scenario game Workshop Package to Engage Future Thinking, 2009 • Development of a Process to Turn Plausible Scenarios into On-Ground Action, 2009 KEYNOTE PRESENTATIONS • 22nd Annual Recycling Association of Minnesota (RAM) / Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA) Conference & Show, Keynote Speaker (October 2017) • Aggregate & Ready Mix Association of Minnesota (ARM) Annual Convention, Minneapolis, USA (November 2017) • National Congress of American Indians – customised Future Game (October 2017) • Travel Oregon, Rural Tourism Studio, Klamath Basin, Oregon, USA (October 2017) • Future of Midwest Agriculture – 2-day think-tank workshop developing scenarios for the future (June 2017) • Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, USA – Community visioning think-tank and workshops (June 2017) • RK Mellon Foundation, Pittsburgh, USA – presentation to Board of Trustees (June 2017) • American Defence Communities Conference – Washington DC, Future of Defence Workforce (June 2017) • National Association of Workforce Development Professionals, New Orleans, USA (May 2017) • Aerospace and Aviation Forum – San Diego USA (May 2017) • Future of Food – International Restaurant Leadership Conference (in collaboration with Griffith Foods), Dubai (October 2016) • North Tyrrhanean Sea – European Union Port Project, Italy and France (February 2015) • St George’s House, Windsor Castle, UK – Building Sustainable Regional Communities (2012) DAVID BEURLE david@future-iq.com City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 15 3.2 Juliana Panetta, J.D., Engagement Specialist RÉSUMÉ EDUCATION Juris Doctor / Doctor of Law Mitchell Hamline School of Law, MN Bachelor of Arts in International Relations Saint Cloud State University, St Cloud MN University of São Paulo (USP), Brazil EMPLOYMENT Minneapolis Grain Exchange, Minneapolis MN 2015-2016 U.S. Bank, Minneapolis, MN, 2011 – 2014 United Nations Association of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN, 2008-2010 JULIANA PANETTA, j.d., b.a. in-house attorney / engagement specialist Juliana Panetta is an attorney and engaging communicator who is passionate about problem solving and creating innovative solutions for complex situations. She was born in São Paulo, Brazil and has particular expertise in Corporate, Employment and Immigration Law, having worked for a futures and options derivatives exchange and for the 5th largest commercial bank in the United States. Juliana’s communication and engagement skills allow her to work alongside stakeholders to develop strategies that ﬁt their long-term goals. Juliana is very interested in stories that emerge through data analysis and collection, and enjoys working with clients to being information to life via Future iQ’s data visualization platform. Juliana was the President of the American Heart Association’s Heart and Stroke Ambassadors group and is a longtime volunteer of Children’s HeartLink, lending her Portuguese language skills to a nonproﬁt that supports the formation of self-sustaining centers of excellence in the treatment of pediatric congenital heart disease in the developing world. RECENT PROJECT EXPERIENCE • Wayzata Community Vision, Wayzata, MN, June 2017 - Present • Future of Midwest Agriculture, University of Minnesota, March 2017 - Present • Edina Nodes and Modes Bridging Sessions, Edina MN 2017 • Community Action Partnership of Hennepin County, St. Louis Park, MN 2017 • Cyber Security Taskforce, Minneapolis Grain Exchange, 2015 - 2016 • Legal Advisory Council Member, U.S. Bank’s Law Division, 2014 • Model UN Program Coordinator, United Nations Association of Minnesota, 2008 - 2010 RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS • City of Wayzata Scenarios of the Future Report, Wayzata, MN, 2017 • City of Wayzata Community Proﬁle and Benchmark Analysis, Wayzata, MN, 2017 • Future of Midwest Agriculture, Scenarios of The Future Report, Saint Paul, MN, 2017 • Community Action Partnership of Hennepin County Strategic Plan, Hennepin County, MN, 2017 • Community Action Partnership of Hennepin County Stakeholder Engagement Analysis, Hennepin County, MN, 2017 • Community Action Partnership of Hennepin County Scenario-Based Think Tank Workshop Report, Hennepin County, MN, 2017 • Nodes and Modes, Bridging Between Vision and Planning, Edina, 2017 JULIANA PANETTA juliana@future-iq.com City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 16 3.3 Heather Branigin, Vice-President, Business Development RÉSUMÉ EDUCATION Master of Arts in Teaching Secondary Level, Social Studies University of St. Thomas, MN Bachelor of Arts in Political Science/ International Relations Advanced Language Certiﬁcate: French Literature Carleton College, MN Honours Degree, Neuchâtel Jr. College Neuchâtel, Switzerland EMPLOYMENT City of Edina Edina, MN, 2013-2016 National Collegiate Conference Association - National Model United Nations Minneapolis, MN, 2010-2013 United Nations Association of Minnesota St. Paul, MN, 2007-2010 COMMISSION Notary Public Commission, Exp. January 2019 PHILANTHROPIC WORK Volunteer Judge, Future City Competition, MN, 2017-present Advisory Council Member, United Nations Association of MN, 2014-present Co-President (2011-2013) and Board Member (2010, 2014), United Nations Association of MN HEATHER BRANIGIN, m.a.t., b.a. vice president, business development Heather has worked in the ﬁelds of Development and Education for over 20 years. She has extensive experience in local government and growing small business and organizations, and is an accomplished project manager, research analyst and writer. Originally from Canada, Heather has an educational background in Political Science, International Relations and Education. She is Past President and current Advisory Council Member of the United Nations Association of Minnesota and is committed to encouraging international understanding and global collaboration, especially through experiential education programs. Heather has coordinated numerous conferences involving 2,000+ participants, public events and workshops, and applies her research and writing skills in both her professional and volunteer work. Heather researched and co-produced Future iQ’s foresight publications The Future of Food and The Next Industrial Revolution. RECENT PROJECT EXPERIENCE • Rural Community Assistance Partnership Strategic Plan, Washington, DC, 2018 - Present • Wayzata Community Vision, Wayzata, MN, 2017 - 2018 • New Hampshire Aerospace and Defense Export Consortium Strategic Plan, NH, 2017 - Present • Waseca Vision 2030, Strategic Plan and Action Plan, Waseca, MN, 2017 - Present • Edina Nodes and Modes Bridging Sessions, Edina, MN, 2017 • Vision Update 2040, Solid Waste Management Scenario Planning, Scott Watershed Management Organization Scenario Planning, Scott County, MN, 2017 • Community Action Partnership of Hennepin County, St. Louis Park, MN 2017 • The Greater Lima Region, OH, 2016 - 2017 • US Midwest Agriculture-Scenarios of the Future, University of Minnesota, 2016 - Present • City of San Diego, California, 2016 - Present • Community Visioning, Town of Hilton Head Island, SC, 2016 - Present • Task Force Lima, Allen County, OH, 2016 - 2017 • Economic Development Strategy Edina Chamber of Commerce, MN, 2016-2017 • Vision Edina, Edina, MN, 2014-2015 RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS • Waseca Vision 2030 Community Vision and Strategic Action Plan, Waseca, MN 2018 • NHADEC Strategic Action Plan, NH, 2018 • The Next Industrial Revolution, Future iQ, 2017 • NHADEC Strategic Planning Think Tank Report, NH, 2017 • Waseca Vision 2030 Scenario-Based Think Tank Workshop Report, Waseca, MN, 2017 • Scott County 2040 Vision Update Report, Scott County, MN, 2017 • Scott County Solid Waste Management Scenario- Based Planning Workshop Report, Scott County, MN, 2017 • SWMO Scenario-Based Planning Workshop Report, Scott County, MN, 2017 • CAP-HC Scenario-Based Think Tank Workshop Report, Hennepin County, MN, 2017 • Propel San Diego Scenario-Based Think Tank Workshop Report, San Diego, CA, 2017 • Economic Development Strategy, Edina Chamber of Commerce, Edina, MN, 2017 • Edina Chamber of Commerce Stakeholder Engagement Analysis, Edina, MN, 2017 • An Innovation Framework for the Greater Lima Region, OH, 2016 • Industry Cluster and Economic Impact Analysis, Edina, MN, 2016 • Future of Food, Future iQ, 2016 HEATHER BRANIGIN heather@future-iq.com City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 17 4.0 Past Projects 4.1 Six Similar Projects with References Future iQ has completed and is currently working on several similarly-complex projects. We are currently working on a Strategic Plan for Waseca County in Minnesota, as well as a Strategic Roadmap for the Town of Hilton Head Island in South Carolina. These reports will be available once the projects are complete this month. Below are six recently completed strategic visioning and planning reports produced by Future iQ. 4.1.1 City of Edina, Minnesota (2017 and 2014-2015) Nodes and Modes: Bridging Between Vision and Planning (2017) In April 2017, Future iQ facilitated two planning sessions that aimed to bridge the gap between the City’s earlier vision project and its upcoming 2018 Comprehensive Plan update. Two community workshops were held including a ‘Big Ideas’ session reaffirming and further exploring the City’s vision priorities, as well as a ‘Big Picture’ session incorporating the ‘Big Ideas’ into concrete planning for the Comprehensive Plan. Time-lapse video and innovative report graphics were highlights of this project. http://future-iq.com/project/nodes-modes-city-edina-usa-2017/ Vision Edina, Edina, Minnesota (2014-2015) Future iQ was contracted by the City of Edina to develop a scenario-based strategic vision framework for the city’s future. From a strategic planning perspective, Vision Edina examined the challenges and opportunities that were identified as having the highest priority within the community. These included the community’s stated desired features to be inclusive and connected; to maintain a “build-to-scale” development perspective; to pursue sustainable environment policies; to remain and build its status as being a community of learning; and to be future-oriented in its planning initiatives. This innovative community visioning and engagement process was set within the context of a major North American metropolitan region incorporating the twin cities of Minneapolis-St. Paul. http://future-iq.com/projects/vision-edina/ Contact: Scott Neal, City Manager City of Edina 4801 W. 50th Street, Edina, MN 55424 Tel: 952-826-0401 Email: sneal@edinamn.gov City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 18 4.1.2 Allen County, Ohio (2016-2017 and 2015) Greater Lima Region Collaborative Growth Plan (2016-2017) Future iQ was contracted to lead the US Department of Defense, Office of Economic Adjustment funded Phase 2 of this project. This contract includes a comprehensive gap analysis of the region, an analysis of local product innovation opportunities and needs, detailed economic and workforce planning and modeling, collaborative action planning, stakeholder engagement and updated network mapping. This project produced a Collaborative Growth Plan for the region. http://future-iq.com/project/greater-lima-region-2016/ Task Force Lima, Ohio (2015) Future iQ was contracted to design and lead the US Department of Defense, Office of Economic Adjustment funded Phase 1 of this project. The project involved scenario planning and stakeholder engagement, detailed network mapping, a regional asset inventory, customized research and extensive organizational facilitation and a Strategic Action Plan for the County. http://future-iq.com/project/task-force-lima/ Contact: Jeff Sprague, President/CEO Allen Economic Development Group 144 S. Main Street, Ste. 200, Lima, OH 45801 Tel: 419-222-7706 Email: Spraguej@aedg.org 4.1.3 Moosehead Lake Regional Plan, Maine (2016-2017) Future iQ was engaged to create a comprehensive regional master plan for the Moosehead Lake region of Maine. The project involves asset mapping of the region’s physical, financial and political capital to inform recommendations for regional land use and infrastructural improvements. This project focused on workforce development, economic diversification, recreational tourism development, guiding visitor flow patterns and building a year-round tourism economy. http://future-iq.com/project/moosehead-lake-region-maine-usa- 2016-17/ Contact: Donna L. Moreland Destination Development Specialist Maine Office of Tourism 59 State House Station, Augusta, ME Tel: 207-624-9808 Email: Donna.Moreland@maine.gov City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 19 4.1.4 Texarkana, Texas (2015) Precipitated by concerns regarding workforce alignment and the future of the Red River Army Depot, Future iQ was contracted by Workforce Solutions Northeast Texas to develop a Strategic Implementation Plan, and help move the process from strategy to action with accompanying recommendations. http://future-iq.com/project/texarkana-defense-project-texas-usa/ Contact: Bart Spivey, Business Development Project Manager Workforce Solutions Northeast Texas 911 N. Bishop Bldg A., Wake Village, TX 75501 Tel: 903-794-9490 ext. 513 Email: Bart.spivey@netxworks.org 4.1.5 New Hampshire Aerospace and Defense Consortium, New Hampshire, (2017-2018) Future iQ was contracted by the State of New Hampshire to develop a five-year strategic plan and roadmap for the statewide nonprofit, New Hampshire Aerospace and Defense Export Consortium (NHADEC). Funding was provided by the Department of Defense, Office of Economic Adjustment. The work included scenario planning and visioning, stakeholder engagement and the production of a long-term strategic plan and roadmap that detailed and prioritized opportunities and challenges that affected NHADEC’s interests and capabilities. http://future-iq.com/project/aerospace-defense-export- consortium-strategy-development-new-hampshire-usa-2017/ Contact: Nathaniel C. Nelson, International Trade Officer Division of Economic Development Department of Business & Economic Affairs State of New Hampshire Tel: 603-271-8444 Email: Nathaniel.Nelson@livefree.nh.gov 4.1.6 Community Action Partnership of Hennepin County, Minnesota (2017) Future iQ was contracted to lead the development of a comprehensive organizational Strategic Plan to establish services, programs and partnerships to address poverty and increase family and economic stability within Hennepin County communities. The project involved scenario planning and stakeholder engagement, research analysis and the production of an Implementation Action Plan as part of the final Strategic Plan. http://future- iq.com/project/community-action-partnership-hennepin-county-minnesota- usa-2017/ City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 20 Contact: Kim Mongoven Director of Planning & Development Community Action Partnership of Hennepin County 8800 Highway 7, Ste. 401, St. Louis Park, MN 55426 Tel: 952-697-1325 Email: kmongoven@caphennepin.org 4.2 Relevant Projects 4.2.1 Town of Hilton Head Island, South Carolina (2016-present) Future iQ has been engaged to create a long-term comprehensive community vision that will guide the community of Hilton Head Island for the next 10-20 years. The island has a highly- developed tourism industry as well as significant historical significance involving unique cultural groups that must be balanced in the development of the community vision. This project will involve extensive community engagement, stakeholder interviews, community surveys, data visualization and analysis, the development of a communications plan and Brand, as well as a strategic roadmap and implementation plan for the vision once created. http://future-iq.com/project/hilton-head-island-south-carolina-usa-2016-17/ 4.2.2 City of San Diego, California (2016-present) Future iQ has been contracted by the City of San Diego, as part of a Department of Defense, Office of Economic Adjustment funded project. This area is home to the largest concentration of military assets in the world. The Future iQ work includes network mapping, economic data collection and analysis, scenario planning and visioning, stakeholder engagement and the delivery of Diversification Plans to facilitate the defense sector workforce adjustment and retraining. http://future-iq.com/project/city-san-diego-california-usa-2016-17/ 4.2.3 Rural Community Assistance Partnership, Washington, D.C. (2018-present) Future iQ has been contracted to lead the development of a comprehensive organizational strategic action plan that will bring a more holistic approach to assisting rural communities through expanded economic development opportunities for the Rural Community Assistance Partnership (RCAP). The project will involve a Benchmark Analysis, visioning and nationwide stakeholder engagement, and the production of a three-year strategic plan that details and prioritizes opportunities and challenges in a strategic roadmap. 4.2.4 B.E.S.T. of Waseca County, Minnesota (2016-present) In collaboration with the firm of LHB, Future iQ has been engaged by the Waseca Business and Entrepreneurial Support Team (B.E.S.T.) to facilitate the development of a common vision, City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 21 strategic plan and action plan for Waseca County, City and area organizations. The project will involve a Benchmark Analysis, communications plan, extensive community engagement and data collection and visualization. The resulting vision, strategic action plan will provide cohesion to community action as well as a unified voice for where the community needs to invest its resources. http://future-iq.com/project/waseca-county-minnesota-usa-2017/ 4.2.5 City of Wayzata, Minnesota (2017-present) Future iQ has been contracted by the City of Wayzata to develop a new Community Vision for that builds on its recent Lake Effect project and creates clear city-wide priorities for the future. The visioning process will involve extensive community engagement and a scenario-based planning methodology that will help the community look forward to the year 2040. The intent is for the resulting vision and priorities to be innovative, inclusive and sustainable and to provide a roadmap to guide and inform Wayzata’s upcoming comprehensive planning process. http://future-iq.com/project/city-wayzata-minnesota-usa-2017/ 4.2.6 Katahdin Collaborative, Maine (2018-present) Future iQ was recently engaged to produce a citizen-driven Regional Vision Plan for the Katahdin Region of rural Maine. The project will involve extensive background research and analysis, community and stakeholder engagement, focus groups, scenario-planning, data collection and visualization, as well as the development of a core values statement to guide the final Katahdin Collaborative Regional Vision Action Plan. 4.2.7 Oshkosh Initiative, Wisconsin (2014-2016) Future iQ was contracted to design and lead a 5-county regional planning effort as part of the economic and workforce diversification and response strategy, funded by the US Department of Defense, Office of Economic Adjustment. This region is home to Oshkosh Corporation, a major defense contractor, and supports a strong manufacturing sector. http://future-iq.com/project/fox-valley-wisconsin/ 4.2.8 Mediterranean Ports Project, Italy/France (2015) The ongoing goal of the EU Programme Maritime is to improve cooperation between border areas in terms of accessibility, innovation, enhancement of natural and cultural resources and integration of resources and services to increase regional competitiveness. Future iQ was contracted to implement a future orientated scenario-planning methodology with broad cross- sectional representatives from the various port cities within four large sub-regions producing individual reports for each of the four regions of study. The four studies were compiled in a Joint Analysis Report and presented as part of the Strategic Plan of the port cities of the North Tyrrhenian Sea. http://future-iq.com/project/mediterranean-sea-ports-project/ City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 22 4.3 Additional Relevant Experience Below are several relevant current and past projects that illustrate the breadth of our experience. To see a complete inventory of Future iQ’s specialized projects, please visit: http://future-iq.com/featured-projects/. • Snohomish County, Washington (2017-2018). Future iQ was contracted to conduct the first phase of this project. Building off the 2018-2022 Snohomish Strategic Tourism Plan, Future iQ will perform background research including an online regional industry participant survey to gauge perceptions about the future of tourism in each region, areas of opportunity and threat, changes occurring and the appetite for change and sensitivity to a range of future shaping trends. http://future-iq.com/project/snohomish- county-regional-destination-development-washington-usa/ • Edina Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Strategy, Minnesota (2016- 2017). Future iQ was engaged by the Edina Chamber of Commerce to develop a new economic development strategy that it could use over the next ten years. This research produced a complete economic profile and industry cluster analysis of Edina, a stakeholder engagement analysis, and a recommended economic development strategy and implementation plan covering the next 1, 5 and 10 years. http://future- iq.com/project/economic-development-plan-edina-minnesota/ • University of Minnesota-Twin Cities (2016-present). Future iQ is working on a collaborative research project with the University of Minnesota to explore the sustainable intensification of Midwest agriculture through the use of scenario planning. Anticipated outcomes include a more in depth understanding of plausible futures for U.S. Midwest agriculture and how the role of these narratives promote cooperation and innovation in the industry, as well as the development of a broad vision and strategic plan for a new agricultural bio-economy in the Midwest. http://future- iq.com/project/u-s-midwest-agriculture-scenarios-future-2016-17/ • Scott County, Minnesota (2017). Future iQ was engaged to work on two County projects. The first project involved two half-day scenario-planning workshops for the Environmental Services Department. These workshops each separately explored scenarios and helped to prioritize action steps for Scott County Waste Management and the Scott Watershed Management Organization. The second project involved facilitating Scott County’s 2040 Vision Update Workshop. All three workshops involved the exploration of future trends that affect the County and a prioritization of focus areas in preparation for department updates to the Comprehensive Plan. http://future- iq.com/project/scott-county-minnesota-usa-2017/ • National Congress of American Indians, Arizona (2016-2017). Production of a unique version of the Future Game built around the interface and engagement between researchers and Native American communities and leaders. http://future- iq.com/project/national-congress-american-indians-usa-2016/ • Travel Oregon, Oregon (2016-present). Travel Oregon embarked on a regional tourism planning process and over the past two years contracted with Future iQ to assist with City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 23 the development of a regional tourism planning framework, connecting regional plans together and linking them to the overall Travel Oregon strategic plan. This included stakeholder planning and visioning sessions in all 7 major regions across Oregon. The results of this project produced a strategic vision and action plan for each region in relation to the overall planning framework. http://future-iq.com/project/oregon- regional-tourism-planning-usa/ • Travel Oregon’s Tourism Studios, Oregon (2009-2016). The Oregon Rural Tourism Studio program is a training and capacity building program designed to assist Oregon communities that have identified tourism development as one of their priority economic development strategies. The program assists communities with the development of their tourism industry in a way that will help stimulate the local economy, protect and enhance local natural and cultural resources, and foster pride amongst participants. http://future-iq.com/projects/rural-tourism-studio-oregon-usa/ • Griffith Foods, Illinois (2015-2017). Griffith Foods is a global food ingredient company based in the Midwest with operations in over 20 countries. Future iQ has been working with the global leadership team to build the strategic foresight capacity and undertake scenario planning work, as the company undertakes a major refocus of its global operations. http://future-iq.com/project/griffith-foods-chicago-usa-2016/ • Nebraska Views of the Future, Nebraska (2015-2016). Engaged by the Nebraska Economic Development Association, Future iQ presented a future-planning workshop to over 70 stakeholders as part of a professional development program. http://future-iq.com/project/nebraska-views-of-the-future-usa/ • Australian Grain Industry (2009-2015). Funded by the Grains Research and Development Corporation, Future iQ was engaged to conduct scenario planning, network mapping, and additional research. http://future-iq.com/project/australian-grain-industry/ • Kewaunee Region, Wisconsin (2013-2014). Following the announced closure of a regional nuclear power station, Future iQ was contracted to design and lead a three- county long-term regional planning effort as part of the economic response strategy. This work included stakeholder engagement, future planning and focus group sessions involving over 400 people. A comprehensive vision-based regional action plan has been developed to align the region and key organizations around economic innovation and collaboration. http://future-iq.com/projects/kewaunee-nuclear-power-station-closure/ • The Community Progress Initiative, Wisconsin (2003-2009). The Future iQ team were the key designers and facilitators of this initiative, which was created to address the substantial local economic impact of the downturn in the paper manufacturing industry. This region is home to several very large paper making businesses, and is a renowned Cranberry producing region. The Community Progress Initiative played a role to define a new vision, and act as a catalyst in shifting culture from dependent to self-reliant, building new and engaged civic processes. http://future-iq.com/projects/community- progress-initiative-wisconsin-usa/ • Mountains of León – Northern Spain (2013-14). This region of 60,000 is undergoing unemployment, youth outmigration, an aging population and a lack of industry. While it City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 24 straddles the famous Camino Trail, the region is not yet maximizing this advantage. Future iQ worked with local organizations to create a process that brought future thinking to the region and enabled people to work together as a community to shape the future. http://future-iq.com/projects/mountains-of-leon-forging-the-future-leon-spain/ • Government of Alberta, Canada (2009-014). Future iQ worked with the Government of Alberta on a range of projects including regional planning, developing, and facilitating the development of the Small Business Strategy, Research and Facilitation publications and Regional Workshops as part of the Service Provider Network for the Province. http://future-iq.com/project/regional-and-economic-development-in-alberta/ • Future West Cork – Ireland (2009-12). This regional visioning project drew together stakeholders from across the West Cork Region (pop >100,000). It explored the long- term future and designed, facilitated and implemented an intensive engagement process giving 800 people comprehensive input. This region is one of the key food destination regions in Western Europe. http://future-iq.com/projects/future-west-cork/ 4.4 Foresight Experience Future iQ has considerable experience in producing global foresight publications, research and Think Tanks. These research projects help build understanding of future trends impacting communities, workforce, economic development and associated economies. Below is a list of recent foresight publications, as well as a link to Future iQ’s 2012 global foresight conference. • The Next Industrial Revolution (2017) This research explores the breadth of the Next Industrial Revolution and analyzes its potential implications for all areas of our lives. http://future-iq.com/resources-and-reports/reports-2/ • The Future of Manufacturing (2016) This research analyzes and discusses the key trends that are impacting the global manufacturing sector. http://future- iq.com/project/future-manufacturing-2016/ • The Future of Food (2016) This research examines a range of critical catalysts of change relating to the global food supply chain and the potential impacts upon human health, the environment and food security. http://future- iq.com/project/future-food-2016/ City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 25 • Economics of Collaboration (2015) This research links together the theory of collaborative behavior with real world experiences around building collaborative planning and action. http://future-iq.com/project/economics-of- collaboration/ • Cities of The Future (2014-15) This publication examines future trends and possibilities in city planning and development. http://future-iq.com/project/cities-of- the-future/ • Global Think Tank – Windsor Castle, UK (2012) Future iQ hosted and facilitated a global consultation entitled, ‘Building Sustainable Regions in Today’s World’, at St Georges House, Windsor Castle. http://future-iq.com/projects/st-georges-house/ City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 26 5.0 Project Timeline The following chart outlines key stages and suggested periods of activities. This timeline reflects the relative emphasis of activity and is flexible depending on the needs of Coppell. Work on some key deliverables will occur in parallel allowing the stages to be completed within the project timeline. Key Phases Key Deliverables M A M J J A S O N D J Phase 1: Initial Planning and Background Research Initial planning, meetings and schedule Background research on key tasks, trends and studies Benchmark Analysis Report Phase 2: Future Scenarios and Engagement Pre-Think-Tank surveys Coppell Future Think-Tank Workshop Scenarios of the Future Report Community and stakeholder engagement Engagement support training Surveys, data collection and analysis Data visualization platform Community and Stakeholder Analysis Report Phase 3: Draft Coppell 20Next Plan Think Tank Reconvene Focus Groups Draft Coppell 20Next Plan Framework Initiatives and prioritization matrix Roadmap and key measures Phase 4: Coppell 20Next Plan Finalization and Presentations Final Coppell 20Next Plan Graphics and visuals Presentation Coppell 20Next Plan to City Council and Staff Community presentations (3) of Coppell 20Next Plan City of Coppell Vision 2040 Strategic Plan – Submitted by Future iQ, February 2018 27 6.0 Cost Proposal Future iQ operates on a fixed-price delivery. The fees below include all travel and accommodation costs and overheads for the Project Director and staff. Future iQ assumes that the City of Coppell will provide venues for workshop sessions and presentations, as required. Key Phases Key Components Cost Phase 1: Initial Planning and Background Research • Initial planning, meetings, and schedule • Background research on key tasks, trends and studies • Benchmark Analysis Report $3,000 $5,000 $6,000 Phase 2: Future Scenarios and Engagement • Pre-think tank surveys • Coppell Future Think Tank workshop • Scenarios of the Future Report • Community and stakeholder engagement • Engagement support training (optional) • Surveys, data collection and analysis • Data visualization platform • Community and Stakeholder Engagement Report $4,000 $12,000 $6,000 $8,000 $2,000 $34,000 $7,000 $6,000 Phase 3: Draft Coppell 20Next Plan • Think Tank Reconvene to develop strategic action areas and priorities • Focus Groups to develop roadmap and key measures • Draft Coppell 20Next Plan Framework • Initiatives and prioritization matrix • Roadmap and key measures $6,000 $4,000 $10,000 $3,000 $4,000 Phase 4: Coppell 20Next Plan Finalization and Presentations • Final Coppell 20Next Plan • Graphics and visuals including streetscape renderings • Final presentation of Coppell 20Next Plan to City Council and Staff • Community presentations (3) of Coppell 20Next Plan $12,000 $7,000 $3,000 $4,500 Total Fees & Expenses FIXED PRICE PROPOSAL $146,500 Proposed payment schedule: • 20% on signing of contract • 20% at completion of phases 1, 2, 3 and 4 Please note that the proposed schedule and budget are flexible, based on the needs of the City of Coppell. We are open to scaling and modifications as needed. 7.0 Conflict of Interest Questionnaire This form is not applicable to Future iQ, Inc. Future iQ does not have any business relationship with a local government entity in the State of Texas. Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3822 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3822 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: City Council 02/20/2018File Created: Final Action: Citizen's Agenda RequestFile Name: Title: CITIZEN’S AGENDA REQUEST: Issues with (1) making both lanes Right-turn only thus preventing citizens from turning left on Parkway Blvd to return home from the school and causing traffic hazards by compelling these citizens to make a right and then make U-Turns and, (2) inquiring into the functionality of said traffic control device since it’s installation. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: 22. Sponsors: Enactment Date: Memo - Venky Venkatraman.pdf, Certified ORR from City of Coppell.pdf, Email.pdf, FW_ Traffic signal question.pdf Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 Pass03/27/201803/27/2018City CouncilPostponed02/27/2018City Council Mayor Hunt announced that the requester had asked for this item to be postponed until the Council meeting on March 27, 2018. She asked the Council for a motion regarding this request. A motion was made by Councilmember Brianna Hinojosa-Flores, seconded by Councilmember Mark Hill, to postpone Agenda Item 10 until the Council meeting on March 27, 2018. The motion passed by an unanimous vote. Action Text: Councilmember Cliff Long, Brianna Hinojosa-Flores, Councilmember Gary Roden, Councilmember Marvin Franklin, Councilmember Mark Hill, and Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling 6Aye: Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3822) 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3822 Title CITIZEN’S AGENDA REQUEST: Issues with (1) making both lanes Right-turn only thus preventing citizens from turning left on Parkway Blvd to return home from the school and causing traffic hazards by compelling these citizens to make a right and then make U-Turns and, (2) inquiring into the functionality of said traffic control device since it’s installation. Summary Fiscal Impact: Staff Recommendation: Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Business Prosperity Community Wellness and Enrichment Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Mike Land, City Manager Date: February 23, 2018 Reference: Citizens Agenda Request – Venky Venkatraman 2030: Special Place to Live - Goal 4: Quality Mobility Within Coppell General Information: On February 11, 2018 Mr. Venkatraman submitted a Citizen’s Agenda Request with multiple items. His request was reviewed in accordance with the following section of the City of Coppell’s Code of Ordinances: 1-10-6.1.2. Citizens' submission of agenda items. A. Any resident of the City of Coppell shall have the right and opportunity to submit a request to place an agenda item for a subject for which the city council can legally take action. A request by a citizen to place an item on an agenda must be submitted in writing to the office of the city manager no later than 10:00 a.m., ten business days preceding the regular meeting at which the request is to be considered. The request must clearly state the nature and subject for which the council has subject matter jurisdiction. Once an agenda item has been considered by the city council, that issue or subject may not be placed on a future agenda by a resident sooner than 12 months from council meeting where such subject was considered. B. In the opinion of the city manager the agenda's the requested meeting is lengthy, he or she may defer the item to the next regular meeting of the council. In the case of a delay, the city manager will notify the citizen of the delay no later than the Friday preceding the regular meeting requested by the citizen. In no case, may a citizen's request be delayed for more than one regular meeting. C. If the request does not state an actionable subject for which the council has jurisdiction, the citizen shall be advised in writing and the matter will not be placed on the agenda or may be referred to a future council workshop consideration. Once an item has been placed on an agenda or considered by council at a duly convened meeting, any further consideration of the subject shall be at the sole discretion of council. 1. If the item is not something which the City Council can legally take action on, a citizen may still address the City Council at any time during the “Citizen Appearance” portion of a regular City Council meeting. The ordinance states: 1-10-6.2.1. Citizen appearance. Persons wishing to speak on any matter other than an item scheduled for a public hearing on the agenda, must sign a register and list their residence address, provided by the city secretary on a table outside the council chambers, and such persons may be heard only at the "citizens appearance" portion of a regular meeting or special meeting. Each speaker must state his or her name and address of residence. Presentations by individuals during the "citizens appearance" shall be limited to two minutes each. An individual speaker's time may be extended for an additional two minutes with the approval of a majority of the council members present. There shall be a cumulative limit of 20 minutes allotted of any regular or special council meeting. Those persons who signed up to speak at the "citizens appearance" shall be called upon in the order that they have signed the provided register. No personal attacks by any speaker shall be made against any member of the council, mayor, individual, group or corporation (Charter Article 3, Section 3.12). After reviewing the items with the City Attorney, it was determined that only one item, concerning the installation and operation of restricted turning lanes at the intersection of Cowboy and Parkway should be considered by the Coppell City Council. The issue Mr. Venkatraman is limited to for this agenda item is as stated in his email submission dated February 11, 2018: “Issues with making both lanes Right-turn only thus preventing citizens from turning left on Parkway Blvd to return home from the school and causing traffic hazards by compelling these citizens to make a right and then make U-Turns (see attached emails from George Marshall)” The other matters raised by Mr. Venkatraman in is request are either technical in nature or beyond the scope or responsibility as they relate to Municipal Court Trial proceedings. As I communicated with Mr. Venkatraman, the Coppell City Council will receive his information and presentation during the regular portion of the City Council meeting on Tuesday February 23, 2018. If after his presentation, the item is something that the City Council may want to consider further and potentially act upon, the item would be scheduled by the City Council for another Council meeting to be held later. Recall, the primary purpose for the Citizens Agenda item is to give a citizen an opportunity to present information specific to the question being asked of the Council. It is a time for the Council to listen and review the information presented. All comments from the requestor should be directed to the City Council. With that understanding, the Council may or may not choose to ask questions after the presentation. The City Council may hear the requestor’s presentation and take it under advisement asking for staff to prepare additional information for them to consider at some later date or the Council may determine that they do not want to consider the matter and the item therefore will not be placed on a future Council agenda. THE·CITY·OF COPPELL COPPELL MUNICIPAL COURT NO.1 Certification I,the undersigned,Belinda De La Pena,of the Coppell Municipal Court No.1,of the City of Coppell,Texas,in the performance of the functions of my office,hereby certify that the attached page(s)of record are true and correct copies as the same appears in record of said Court. Witness my hand and seal of said Court this January 4,2018. Deputy Court Administrator Coppell Municipal Court Attachments:(1) - A FAMILY COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME COPPELL MUNICIPAL COURT NO.1 130 TOWN CENTER BLVD.*COPPELL,TX 75019 *TEL 972/304 3650 *WWW.COPPELLTX.GOV 1.?Reply alii '"iiii Delete Junk I '"••• RE:Request for Public Information -W002877 -091717 Latrice Johnson Today,9:47 AM Jean Dwinnell ~ ••1.?Reply all I '" tnbox Jean, Here are the responses. Responsesto items 1-8 1.Number of tickets issued since installation of this signal due to any traffic light violations and the amount in fines that were assessed. 28 Violations with a fine total of $7,254.80 2.Race and etnnicity of indlvlduais to whom these tickets were issued. 27 -White 1-Black 3.Percentage of these tickets that were issued to drivers for making a left turn when the Signal indicated right turn only. 79% 4.Numbt!r of tickets issued on due to any traffic light violations on September 7,2017,and the amount in fines that were assessed at this sienal 10 Tickets issued in the amount of $2,591.00 S.Race ana etnnic'tty of 'rnd'IV',dua'lsto whom these tickets were issued during this period at this signal. 10-White 6.Percentage of these tickets that were issued to drivers for making a left turn when the signal indicated right turn only during this period at this si2nal. 70% 7.How many tickets 'were issued by Office P.Gonzalez at this signal since the installation of this signal? 28 tickets issued 8.How many tickets 'were issued by Office P.Gonzalez at this Signal on September 7,2017? 10 tickets issued 1 Christel Pettinos From:George Marshall Sent:Tuesday, October 03, 2017 10:46 AM To:venky@att.net Cc:Kenneth Griffin; Kent Collins; Engineer Subject:RE: Concerns about traffic signal Mr. Venkatraman, No, there is not a camera on this signal that records vehicles as they are going through (making left or right turns). Thank You, George George S. Marshall, P.E. Engineering Manager Engineering & Public Works City of Coppell, TX 972-304-3562 (office) 469-964-4731 (cell) www.coppelltx.gov From: Venky Venkatraman [mailto:venky@att.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 12:27 AM To: George Marshall <GMarshall@coppelltx.gov> Cc: Kenneth Griffin <KGriffin@coppelltx.gov>; Kent Collins <KCollins@coppelltx.gov>; Engineer <Engineer@coppelltx.gov> Subject: RE: Concerns about traffic signal George, I have one more question. Is there a camera on this signal that records vehicles as they are going through (making left or right turns)? Thanks. Venky From: George Marshall [mailto:GMarshall@coppelltx.gov] Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 4:31 PM To: venky@att.net Cc: Kenneth Griffin <KGriffin@coppelltx.gov>; Kent Collins <KCollins@coppelltx.gov>; Engineer <Engineer@coppelltx.gov> Subject: RE: Concerns about traffic signal Mr. Venkatraman, 2 1. Can you confirm there is no intelligence built into the signal to stop the RIGHT ONLY from coming on when there is no traffic going west on Parkway? Answer: There is not a way to program that possibility. 2. If so, what fixed times of day does the RIGHT ONLY sign come on and stay on? Answer: The operation times are programmed 7am to 8:30am. We are reviewing the operation as the school start time was changed last week to 8:40am. 3. With respect to your statement “I would note that we recently installed a new signal controller at this location and we are still trouble shooting its operation but that does not impact this issue.” – can you provide some technical details on this signal controller (including but not limited to the types of issues that the trouble shooting might have unearthed) and why it was installed? Answer: The trouble shooting of the operation revolves around how this controller programs a right turn with a non‐ conflicting left turn. There are no operational problems, just additional operations we would like to include. The controller is an Intelight X3 controller. You are more than welcome to get information from the manufacturer’s website. The only thing I would have is a users manual. The reason this signal controller was installed is that we have 35 traffic signals in town and we are replacing all signal controllers used at the intersections so we can have less spare parts on the shelf and to improve efficiency. 4. Was a traffic study done before the signal was installed? Answer: A detailed traffic study was not performed however engineering judgement was used to make the decision to install the traffic signal. 5. Was the no left turn sign included based only on anecdotal opinions from police officers? Answer: The no left turn sign was included in the design because engineering judgement was it would result in safe and efficient traffic and pedestrian flow into and out of the high school. Thank You, George George S. Marshall, P.E. Engineering Manager Engineering & Public Works City of Coppell, TX 972-304-3562 (office) 469-964-4731 (cell) www.coppelltx.gov One more question : was a traffic study done before the signal was installed ... or was the no left turn sign included based only on anecdotal opinions from police officers? Please provide a detailed response as this is a concern of others living in my neighborhood as well. From: Venky Venkatraman [mailto:venky@att.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 9:44 AM To: George Marshall <GMarshall@coppelltx.gov> Cc: Kent Collins <KCollins@coppelltx.gov>; Kenneth Griffin <KGriffin@coppelltx.gov>; Engineer <Engineer@coppelltx.gov> Subject: RE: Concerns about traffic signal George, Thank you for your detailed response. A couple of follow-up questions: 3 You say “Before the traffic signal was installed this intersection was controlled by a police officer who would prevent northbound left turns. When the city installed a traffic signal, the same operation was implemented to preserve safety and operation. The changeable lane use signs would operate such that they would mimic the operation provide by the police officer. ”. However, I know for a fact that the police officer would NEVER stop anyone from making a left turn from Cowboy onto Parkway if there was no traffic traveling westbound on Parkway at that time. That leads me to 2 more questions: 1. Can you confirm there is no intelligence built into the signal to stop the RIGHT ONLY from coming on when there is no traffic going west on Parkway? 2. If so, what fixed times of day does the RIGHT ONLY sign come on and stay on? With respect to your statement “I would note that we recently installed a new signal controller at this location and we are still trouble shooting its operation but that does not impact this issue.” – can you provide some technical details on this signal controller (including but not limited to the types of issues that the trouble shooting might have unearthed) and why it was installed? Look forward to your reply. Venky From: George Marshall [mailto:GMarshall@coppelltx.gov] Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 4:07 PM To: venky@att.net Cc: Kent Collins <KCollins@coppelltx.gov>; Kenneth Griffin <KGriffin@coppelltx.gov>; Engineer <Engineer@coppelltx.gov> Subject: RE: Concerns about traffic signal Mr. Venkatraman, I responded via voicemail as you had called me requesting a response immediately. I have explained in detail over the phone with you in the past and the end for the conversation you told me you understand why we included a time of day left turn restriction. To respond to your question why we cannot allow left turns at all times of day please see as follows: Before the traffic signal was installed this intersection was controlled by a police officer who would prevent northbound left turns. When the city installed a traffic signal, the same operation was implemented to preserve safety and operation. The changeable lane use signs would operate such that they would mimic the operation provide by the police officer. The right turn only restriction for the northbound direction allows the signal to provide the following benefits: 1) During the same time period that the westbound left turn operates, the northbound direction can provide right turn movements This decreases the likelihood of any traffic backup of westbound Parkway into Denton Tap, which has occurred in the past. 2) At the same time, pedestrians cross on the west side of the intersection during the northbound time period. If we prevent the left turn movement with the lane use sign then the pedestrians are safer when crossing the intersection. I would note that we recently installed a new signal controller at this location and we are still trouble shooting its operation but that does not impact this issue. 4 For those that live on the west side of the intersection or those wishing to head westbound on Parkway there are several options: 1) NB Parkway/Cowboy turn right, turn right on Denton Tap, right at Sandy Lake, right on N. Coppell and right onto Parkway. (Google maps from the intersection to Graham Drive would be 6‐12 min at 8:30am via this route and 2‐3 min if able to turn left). 2) Make a u‐turn at the median opening at Wallgreens. In the grand scheme of traffic operations the city looks at all aspects of traffic flow and existing traffic conditions to make decisions on how to manage that traffic. Sometimes it means restricting movements by time of day, which we know can cause additional delay to some drivers, but it has benefits to the overall operation of the intersection. At this time, the City will not make any changes to the northbound left turn restriction by time of day. If in the future, traffic patterns change or the use nearby changes then the city could re‐evaluate the situation. Next year, when the 9th grade moves to Wrangler may be a good time to re‐evaluate. Thank You, George George S. Marshall, P.E. Engineering Manager Engineering & Public Works City of Coppell, TX 972-304-3562 (office) 469-964-4731 (cell) www.coppelltx.gov From: Venky Venkatraman [mailto:venky@att.net] Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2017 12:57 PM To: George Marshall <GMarshall@coppelltx.gov> Cc: Kenneth Griffin <KGriffin@coppelltx.gov>; Kent Collins <KCollins@coppelltx.gov>; Engineer <Engineer@coppelltx.gov> Subject: RE: Concerns about traffic signal Importance: High George, I received your voicemail response yesterday. I would prefer a written response to my complaint, which to reiterate is “For the benefit of those living west of the school, I am asking that at no time of the day left turns should be prevented from Cowboy drive onto Parkway and if this request cannot be accommodated, then I would like to know the exact reasons why.” Can you send one across ASAP? Thanks. Venky From: Venky Venkatraman [mailto:venky@att.net] Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 11:06 AM To: 'George Marshall' <GMarshall@coppelltx.gov> Cc: 'Kenneth Griffin' <KGriffin@coppelltx.gov>; 'Kent Collins' <KCollins@coppelltx.gov>; 'engineer@coppelltx.gov' 5 <engineer@coppelltx.gov> Subject: RE: Concerns about traffic signal George, In that case, my complaint is as follows: I live on Gifford Drive which is west of the school. So if I am prevented from turning left onto Parkway from Cowboy Drive when trying to return home from school, it is a major inconvenience as then I have to turn right on Parkway and then try to make a U-turn on at the left turn for Walgreen where it disrupts oncoming traffic and it is difficult to make a U during rush hour. For the benefit of those living west of the school, I am asking that at no time of the day left turns should be prevented from Cowboy drive onto Parkway and if this request cannot be accommodated, then I would like to know the exact reasons why. Please confirm you will treat this as a “complaint” and follow-up. Thanks. Venky P.S. I will seek the remining information that I requested via an Open Records Request which I will be filing shortly. From: George Marshall [mailto:GMarshall@coppelltx.gov] Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 10:05 AM To: venky@att.net Cc: Kenneth Griffin <KGriffin@coppelltx.gov>; Kent Collins <KCollins@coppelltx.gov> Subject: RE: Concerns about traffic signal Mr. Venkatraman, A complaint we might recieve would be something like “I don’t like how the city operates the signal at xyz intersection. I live on xx street and need to be able to do xx. My problems is typically around xx time xx day of the week.” We also receive may other types of issues that might need to be addressed such as floodplain inquiries or requesting to add sidewalk or a ramp at a given location or possibly, can you look into fixing this pothole on x street. Thank you, George George S. Marshall, P.E. Engineering Manager Engineering & Public Works City of Coppell, TX 972-304-3562 (office) 469-964-4731 (cell) www.coppelltx.gov 6 From: Venky Venkatraman [mailto:venky@att.net] Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 9:29 AM To: George Marshall <GMarshall@coppelltx.gov> Cc: Kenneth Griffin <KGriffin@coppelltx.gov>; Kent Collins <KCollins@coppelltx.gov> Subject: RE: Concerns about traffic signal George, I know how to file an Open Records request. What type of complaints do you expect to be filed at the engineer email address? Venky From: George Marshall [mailto:GMarshall@coppelltx.gov] Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 7:37 AM To: venky@att.net Cc: Kenneth Griffin <KGriffin@coppelltx.gov>; Kent Collins <KCollins@coppelltx.gov> Subject: RE: Concerns about traffic signal Mr. Venkatraman, The information you are requesting would be considered an open records request. Please contact the City Secretary’s office for that process. http://www.coppelltx.gov/government/city‐secretary http://www.coppelltx.gov/Pages/Requests‐for‐Public‐Information.aspx The email address engineer@coppelltx.gov was given to you as the appropriate email to lodge a complaint. Thank You, George George S. Marshall, P.E. Engineering Manager Engineering & Public Works City of Coppell, TX 972-304-3562 (office) 469-964-4731 (cell) www.coppelltx.gov From: Venky Venkatraman [mailto:venky@att.net] Sent: Friday, September 15, 2017 3:15 PM To: Engineer <Engineer@coppelltx.gov> Subject: Concerns about traffic signal This is with reference to the traffic signal facing Cowboy at the intersection of Parkway where the one of the left turn lanes is converted into a right only lane during certain times of the day. With reference to this signal, I am seeking the following information: 7 1. Date the signal was installed 2. Rationale for installing this signal 3. Dates of maintenance of this signal 4. Records related to any malfunctioning of this signal 5. Records of any repairs performed on this signal 6. Number of complaints received regarding the functioning of this signal since its installation Please provide this information ASAP. Thanks. Venky Venkatraman From:Gaby De La Garza To:Christel Pettinos Cc:Bob Hager Subject:FW: Traffic signal question Date:Thursday, March 22, 2018 10:26:52 AM Good morning Christel, Would you please add the below email to the agenda item for Mr. Venky’s presentation. Thank you! Gaby de la Garza Nichols | Jackson, LLP Direct: 214-665-3322 Email: gdelagarza@njdhs.com This email message is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. sections 2510-2521 and is legally privileged. Further, thisemail message and any documents accompanying it may contain privileged and confidential attorney-client communications and/or attorney workproduct. It is transmitted for the exclusive information and use of the intended recipient(s). If you have received this email transmission and/or anyaccompanying document(s) in error please notify the sender immediately by email or telephone at (214) 965-9900 and delete the transmission andany accompanying document(s) from your system. If you are not the intended recipient of this email and/or any accompanying document(s) you arehereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication and/or documents(s) attached hereto is strictly prohibited. From: Robert Hager Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 10:25 AM To: Gaby De La Garza <gdelagarza@NJDHS.COM> Subject: FW: Traffic signal question From: Venky Venkatraman <venky@att.net> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 11:40 AM To: Robert Hager <Rhager@njdhs.com> Cc: citycouncil@coppelltx.gov Subject: FW: Traffic signal question Mr. Hagar, Please add this email as an exhibit in my presentation. Thanks. Venky From: George Marshall <GMarshall@coppelltx.gov> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2018 2:22 PM To: venky@att.net Cc: Michael Land <MLand@coppelltx.gov>; Kenneth Griffin <KGriffin@coppelltx.gov>; Kent Collins <KCollins@coppelltx.gov>; Christel Pettinos <cpettinos@coppelltx.gov> Subject: RE: Traffic signal question Mr. Venkatraman, The short answer is no we do not have a time of day restriction on traffic movements where drivers are prevented from turning back in the direction they came from at any other intersections. We do have a changeable lane use sign up at Denton Tap and Parkway in the northbound direction where the through lanes reduce to two and add a left turn lane. This location adds an additional left turn lane and restricts the through movement from that lane. Thank You, George George S. Marshall, P.E. Engineering ManagerEngineering & Public Works City of Coppell, TX 972-304-3562 (office) 469-964-4731 (cell) www.coppelltx.gov From: Venky Venkatraman <venky@att.net> Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2018 12:09 AM To: George Marshall <GMarshall@coppelltx.gov> Subject: Traffic signal question George, I would like to know if there are any other signals in Coppell where at certain times of the day drivers are prevented from turning back in the direction they came from like the signal at Cowboy and Parkway. Look forward to your response. Venky Venkatraman Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3858 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3858 Agenda Item Agenda Ready 1Version: Reference: In Control: City Council 03/23/2018File Created: Final Action: Mayor and Council AnnouncementsFile Name: Title: A.Report by Mayor Hunt regarding upcoming Spring events. B.Report by Mayor Hunt regarding upcoming elections. Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: Sponsors: Enactment Date: Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3858 Title A.Report by Mayor Hunt regarding upcoming Spring events. B.Report by Mayor Hunt regarding upcoming elections. Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3858) Summary Fiscal Impact: [Enter Fiscal Impact Statement Here] Staff Recommendation: [Enter Staff Recommendation Here] Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Business Prosperity Community Wellness and Enrichment Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master City of Coppell, Texas 255 Parkway Boulevard Coppell, Texas 75019-9478 File Number: 2018-3851 File ID: Type: Status: 2018-3851 Agenda Item Council Committee Reports 1Version: Reference: In Control: City Council 03/19/2018File Created: Final Action: Committee ReportsFile Name: Title: A.North Texas Council of Governments - Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling B.North Texas Commission - Councilmember Marvin Franklin C.Historical Society - Councilmember Cliff Long Notes: Agenda Date: 03/27/2018 Agenda Number: Sponsors: Enactment Date: Attachments: Enactment Number: Hearing Date: Contact: Effective Date: Drafter: History of Legislative File Action: Result: Return Date: Due Date: Sent To: Date: Acting Body: Ver- sion: 1 03/27/2018City Council Text of Legislative File 2018-3851 Title A.North Texas Council of Governments - Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Yingling B.North Texas Commission - Councilmember Marvin Franklin C.Historical Society - Councilmember Cliff Long Summary Page 1City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018 Master Continued (2018-3851) Fiscal Impact: [Enter Fiscal Impact Statement Here] Staff Recommendation: [Enter Staff Recommendation Here] Goal Icon: Sustainable City Government Business Prosperity Community Wellness and Enrichment Sense of Community Special Place to Live Page 2City of Coppell, Texas Printed on 3/23/2018